Mannyb

I’m gonna go first and admit that I used to objectify women until just very recently & that’s what most men do, of course they’re just not aware of it. It stemmed from a sense of lack, wanting to find ❤️ through women instead of sharing love with a woman. What everyone wants is ❤️, thinking you want anything less is delusion. Happy women’s day btw! I also think that we should start emphasizing the difference between men/women & boys/girls, and it ain’t about age ?

@Emerald I couldn’t agree more with what you’re saying, that’s why us men should read & practice what’s in Deida’s books. Learn to love the feminine in the world, women, men and ourselves. It’s one of our biggest shadows. ??

Have you read David Deida? He goes much deeper than what you are talking about here. I won’t even begin to describe it, just read it. I’m sure you’d love it ? He’s all about masculine feminine energy & opening as love, it’s truly amazing ?? He approaches sex from the POV of awareness, giving life long practices for enlightened sexual living. Fucking life as ❤️

From what I’m reading in his books it’s close to as good as it gets from a mans POV, my mom herself is loving his book Blue Truth. What worthwhile recommendations would you consider, from a woman’s POV? For both men and women.

That’s a good one! Although it’s hard to yet imagine Leo on another podcast, it’d be awesome. @BlackPhil I agree with Leo, it would be like a 17th century puritanical family of settlers inviting black phillip to their homestead. They are just not yet aware of wanting to live deliciously ? ? At the end of the day it will happen when a podcaster decides to invite Leo and he decides to accept going in, until then let’s enjoy whatever happens.

“Spiritual progress ensues automatically from choosing goodwill, forgiveness and lovingness as a way of being rather than viewing it as a gain-seeking transaction.” - David R. Hawkins ??

He’s just afraid, scared of the truth. He’s one of those that isn’t willing to admit God as all as ❤️, he wants God to be “Good” and not “Bad”. That creates a ‘big’ shadow in him, his belief in free individuals separate from God doesn’t help either. He’s basically saying that life is suffering and there’s no escaping that, which is what keeps him away from love.

@ivankiss I’m experiencing heaven right now with you, I acknowledge your “finite mind” as integral to our shared being, our shared love for awakening. Namaste brother ?? Let’s radiate more love with beautiful threads like this one ☝? Thank you dear!

Leo was addressing a person, not God. God gets it, God is understanding itself. Sam as a character in God’s dream is in denial about his very nature, it’s simple. I (relatively speaking) care about what he thinks, since his audience is quite big, and he could be spreading love, beauty, understanding and happiness instead of fear, doubt, and fundamental ignorance of the fact that we share our being. The implications of such a realization are already starting to have a big impact in many of us, and soon our society. To be lost in the dream is to not know this is a dream. Once you know you are dreaming you’re not lost anymore. Here we are having a conversation within the dream, doesn’t mean we are lost at all. Only those who think themselves to be separate and reality to be out there made of matter, in time and space are lost.

You’re implying I is a separate thing. You are god, and can only seem to be confused, same with Sam. God can’t be confused. God is pure understanding.

Awareness (being aware of being aware) is aware of being aware, that’s it. It is not a thing, there can’t be more of it, it is ♾ and eternal. Rupert gets it, most of us here get it, Sam does not, do you get it?

You equate them, that doesn’t mean they are equal. Experience is real & made of consciousness, that doesn’t make it material. Yes there would be a you which is no other than awareness or more correctly “being aware of being aware”. Sam doesn’t want to admit that, otherwise he would agree with Rupert and spread the love of non duality. Namaste ??

Sure, if so you say. Just be clear and straight to the point. Your previous comment implies you agree with Rupert, yet when he mentions finite minds you seem to resist such a concept, although you seem open to concepts such as hair, thoughts and so on. The fact of experience is there is only the knowing of it, that’s what Rupert says and that can not be disproven.

This part of our understanding we can agree on, most of us here wouldn’t dispute that. It’s the other things you’ve said which don’t make sense.

@Valwyndir Yes! That’s why it’s called non duality and not oneness. @Mason Riggle either you’re onto something, or you’re the confused one. If you really believe to have a more complete understanding than everyone on this forum, Rupert Spira, and other teachers, then why not start a different thread in which you could attempt to enlighten us? Or maybe you could make a video / write a book. Don’t tell us there’s no “you” who could do that since you’ve already been interacting and dragging this out for too long. Same for you @Coldbrain

Then start teaching & start with Rupert, Leo etc... since you seem to be the only one awake here. Btw you haven’t convinced anyone other than yourself here, good luck ?

The realist and idealist perspectives are mere philosophy. And why insist on it having to matter? Again, Sam is real and his reality is imaginary, so is his perspective. ??

Real does not imply material! That’s the whole point of Rupert’s consciousness only model.

Well, sorry to break it to you, but he is real and his reality is that of being a dreamed character.

That conclusion does not reflect true understanding. Materialism is not true because no one has ever found a thing called matter, and no one ever could. That is true honesty, and leads to understanding. And that has already happened for some of us (perhaps including yourself, although it doesn’t seem that way), but definitely not for Sam.

It’s not either or, it’s both, your mind can’t understand it, that’s why it resists that possibility, so does Sam Harris’ mind.

His point is wrong because it concludes materialism to be true just because of the apparent illusion.

Although, according to Sam you might be, who really knows? That is true agnosticism, isn’t it? Since you find it ridiculous, you don’t truly agree with him, if you did, you’d find it reasonable.

True. Doesn’t change the fact that while you/I were identifying with a character, that character was “pushed” to admit to being aware of the dream by another seeming “character” at first, only to realize that I am always aware of being aware.

“But yes, one seamless ocean and all apparent things like currents within the ocean.” Rupert Spira