SQAAD

I deliberately used this title to stir up some emotions I will be brief and conscise because i have to engage in some survival functions soon. I was raised up not poor but not rich either. There was a time in my life where my needs where being met. My physical needs mostly. This allowed the opportunity to say for few years "fk survival. Im just gonna put all my energy and focus on spirituality" And i did that until it became untenable. Now i find myself regularly getting homicidal, feeling rage , bitterness and anger. Im not a violent person. I have just smashed few objects here and there, to allow the furious energy to move. I have come to realize that if i don't fullfill certain needs i will do bad things to myself or possibly even others. Check what the Unabomber did. Only thing that gives me joy is walking, reading, atttending NA meetings and doing my spiritual practice. The spiritual practice i do, is the most important thing in my life right now. I value it more than anything. But i need to eat good food and be othetwise healthy to maintain this practice. My problem is this: I feel very confused and i dont understand. What transcending survival even means? These urges and drives are like laws of nature that i dont ever see getting rid of. They can definitely be diminished in intensity but never obliterated (i assume). I have heard many contradictory things from teachers. Others are very survival based (like Leo). Othes like David Parish say "if you have a roof over your head and a meal inside yout stomach then you should be meditating 30 mins everyday like your life depends on it". How should one approach the continuous , never-ending adaptive problems of survival while at the same time pursuing spiritual work?

Every day I see more clearly that Leo’s ideas about selfishness, ego, and survival are accurate. It’s hard for me to accept this, because I’m not like most people, and I tend to assume others think and act like I do. But I’ve realized that someone who is drawn to Leo’s teachings already works on a different level than the average person. This isn’t about being morally better — it’s just an observation. How many people in real life are anything like Eckhart Tolle or Leo? Probably none. I know I haven’t met anyone like that. Living on my own for the past 13–14 months, in very harsh conditions, I’ve seen how petty, selfish, scared, and confused people can be. Here are the things I’ve confirmed for myself about the common, low-consciousness human: They act almost mechanically in most areas of life, except in the few things they’ve mastered. They come up with excuses to avoid doing the right thing, even when the right thing is obvious from looking at the whole situation. They are exremely selfish and focused only on what brings them pleasure or avoids pain. They only pay attention to two things: what benefits them and what threatens their comfort. They are fear-driven and not very loving. They always need a reason to care about someone. If there is no reason, they don’t bother.

@Human Mint No. This is false. Awakening doesnt make you understand everything at once. There are levels to this.

@Someone here Your life is a piece of cake until Life hits you really hard eventually.. Also because your parents are taking care of your survival and investing heavily on you.

@Malkom I intuit that God is Good. What about Nirvana and the cessation of all desires? Is it a pipe dream?

@Someone here Or.. he dies and awakens..

@Joshe What are the rules?

@Leo Gura You have talked about transending survival. Is that even posssible though? Suffering and selfishness is like a law of nature. I don't ever see transcending selfishness as i don't ever see transcending the law of gravity. I can become less selfish though. Could you talk more about that and give specific example?

@TheBG Interesting.

@Leo Gura Why is it selfishness?

@Leo Gura Yes. It's true.. But there are significant differences.. I just don't understand certain despicable behaviors. And i get resentful at certain people.

Let's say that you pretend being a hard nosed scientist. You want "proof" for everything. Then as you sit to eat your dinner, you accept as facts all sorts of feelings, thoughts and images in your head. That you really did went to university and didn't just fabricate that. That you really just returned from work and not just invented that. You hold that as a true and valid memory and not as a false one. Where is your evidence for that? There is none and it can't ever be one. You might go and check and see your diploma that you got from University. You say "here is the proof". Then 10 minutes you go to the bathroom to take a sh!t. And you ask yourself how you really know you went to University. You reply "i remember it". So you hold your memory as true. When Leo is sharing insights in his videos he believes he really did read those books and really did have those experiences that he talks about . If i ask you to check if an alien is sitting under your bed. You check and see no alien there. Then 10 minutes later you ask yourself "how do i know that there is no alien under the bed?" How do you know that your memories are true? Again you have to rely on your memories as true and not mere fabrications. There is no escaping this. Either you question forever and lose your mind completely or you accept your memories, feelings and thoughts as valid. 1. Even the most “rational” or “scientific” person ultimately relies on memory and subjective experience. 2. When we claim to “know” something — like having gone to university — our only evidence is that we remember it. 3. But memory itself is not independently verifiable — it’s an internal experience. 4. Therefore, our most fundamental “knowledge” rests on faith in the reliability of consciousness and memory. 5. If we try to demand proof for everything (including our memories), we end up in an infinite regress — questioning everything until sanity breaks down. 🧩 The core insight: There is no ultimate, external proof for our direct experiences and memories. At the deepest level, all knowledge depends on subjective trust — trust in perception, trust in memory, trust in reasoning. 🧭 The philosophical conclusion From this, we can conclude: 1. Absolute certainty is impossible. Everything we “know” depends on assumptions that can’t be proven without circularity. 2. Practical certainty is necessary. To live and act, we accept memories and perceptions as “true enough.” 3. Science and reason are tools, not ultimate truths. They operate within the framework of trusting our minds and memories. 4. All perspectives — even the scientific one — rest on faith at some foundational level. When Leo makes a video and talks about one of his God Realizations this is as true and as valid as a normie scientist trusting in his memories that he really did return from work 20 minutes ago. *Lol*

@Leo Gura Interesting. I agree. But when in a normal state of Consciousness, it seems like the limited ego mind can always spray doubt and skepticism into everything. This is a challenge that i don't know how it gets resolved...

Let's imagine a specific scenario. Yesterday you went out for a walk in the woods and you saw a bunch of people walking with their dogs and also you had a conversation with Stacey. Next day you wake up and start thinking about your conversation with Stacey. Then you ask yourself: "But how do I actually know that this thing actually happened?" What if you are deluding yourself. What if your mind is making it all up and it never actually happened. The only genuine answer you can come up with is: "I just know it happened. End of story." You could call Stacey and ask her if you really had a conversation with her yesterday, but how do you know that you can trust what she is telling you? There is no proof. There is no process. There are no steps to arrive at this conclusion. It's too direct. That's why I find it funny when normies make fun of spiritual experiences and God realizations. They ask for proof, even though their life doesn't run on proofs. Reality is too direct for it to have a proof. You can always question everything if you want. A God Realization is as real and true as you believing you really talked to Stacey, even though you can't prove it. Scientists are assuming many things they don't know nothing about. The only thing that is not an assumption is my direct experience. I can always question everything else if I want. This is the reason people with OCD go to such extreme lengths. Their mind realizes that everything is groundless but yet they still try to find a ground.

@ivankiss Explain. What do you when you say "There is only infinite consciousness"?

@ivankiss This makes no sense. Everything i experience right now (feelings, thoughts, sounds) is Direct Experience. You could give it any name you want. It may be an illusion. It may be not. But it definitely Is. It exists. Existance is the base.

@Deziree If you want to play that stupid game you can do it all day long.

@ivankiss Lol. Then how i am reading your comment, if there is no direct experience? How can there be even an idea without the experiencing of it?

@Deziree You don't get it. Assume that you Really had a conversation with Stacey yesterday. Let's pretend it Really Happened. After 1 day you wake up in the morning. How can you actually know for sure that you really had a conversation with Stacey yesterday? You cannot prove it. How can you prove that your memories are real and not false? Lol Even if you are a scientist, you believe in your memories that you actually did study science. None of it can be proven. Direct experience needs no proof fot it to exist.

@ivankiss Why not? It's the Only thing that exists right now.

@ivankiss Thanks. I mentioned though that "the only ground is my direct experience".

Because of massive, super extreme type of suffering in my life i have been very motivated to get a better grasp on what reality is all about and how things work. I have distinguished in my mind what is a dopamine hit. I have also distinguished what is satisfaction by doing a concentration exercise. But i do not understand what is happiness if am being totally honest.. Is it a feeling? Well feelings come and go.. Is it the absence of all feelings? What is it? David Parish (spiritual teacher) says that what most people call happiness is actually gratification. Gratification is when you get what you want.

Leo says that people who are not “awake” are unhappy. Is that true? If it is, why? And since, there’s no free will, why would God let billions of people be unhappy — would that make God a sadist? Most people are miserable, but I’ve also seen non-spiritual people who seem content, especially those with a good solid position on the social pyramid. Any thoughts? If people didn't find any happiness, there would be a lot more suicide going on. Peter Ralston says that even normal people can be happy, if they work. Many normies derive happiness from simply working and then meeting their basic needs. Also what about children? They seem quite happy too, even though they are not awake.

@Xonas Pitfall Very good answer. Thank you.

Leo said that meditating for just 20 minutes a day is a trap. And will just make your mind daydream. Well, usually at the first stage of learning how to meditate, you get lost in thinking. That is normal. Also, i think there is a study, showing that just 20-30 minutes of meditation everyday, changed significantly people's brains in 2 months. From my experience this is true also I do not agree with Leo's claim and i am very much surprised that even Leo mentioned something like this... This can get people discouraged and stop meditating alltogether, which is not good. David Parish , advises people to start meditating 30min everyday, like your life depends on it. And i agree with him. It's not realistic for most people to meditate like a monk. Almost nobody has money like that, especially in poor countries.