The observer

Keyhole said: "God is the ultimate sadist. Some people will live great lives who deserve absolute destruction and some who are pure hearted and good will suffer immensely, all in the name of love." I say: Could be, but exclusively from the human perspective. She also said: "That sounds like the rationalization an abuse victim would make. Most of the suffering in the world runs through this same sort of mechanism. If it was true love you wouldn't have suffered at all." I say: Anything anyone will ever say is a rationalization. Some rationalizations are made by victims, some are made by rebels, some are made by lovers, some are made by blind people, etc... You can scream in God's face all you want, or you can kiss God all you want. God remains untouched, because you're imagining God. He doesn't exist. A victim would imagine God to console himself. A rebel would imagine God to fight against himself. A narcissist would imagine God to further love himself. A deluded person would imagine God to remain blind. Pick your identity and imagine all you want. It's all about you. When I talk about God as infinite love, I acknowledge my projection. I know that God is not all loving. But no amount of expression of emotions will get you closer to liberation. All endeavours have a breaking point. They all become useless and addictive after reaching there. Only Truth will heal you and set you free. What you're seeking is not more attachment/stories. What you're seeking is the meta. It's the dis-identification. The perspective of no-perspective. The annihilation of the person. The more stories you attach yourself to, the further you will get from Truth/liberation/healing. The mind will likely come back at this by saying: "you're missing the feminine perspective, you heartless savage masculine bastard blah blah blah." Don't listen to the devil! That's just another trap on the path towards Truth. There's no masculine or feminine. They're both imaginary and interchangeable. Don't limit yourself with either of them. Always start with one, and go with one. You will arrive at the other. You will arrive at One. The circle will be complete, because there's nothing but One. Go all the way. Don't settle for less than full liberation. And remember, eventually, you will have to let go of this narrative too. You will have to face God completely pure, naked like you were born. She also said: "You can call God whatever you like, the only thing that matters is if you're lined up with how you feel authentically wherever that is at, light energy or dark energy." I say: Nothing matters at all. Lined up, out of touch, authenticity, hypocrisy, light energy, dark energy, blah blah blah. Just one more trap for keeping you stuck where you are. Traps don't matter either, but only if you're healed. If you're not yet healed, you would have to follow the pointers first. What are you gonna do about your suffering? That's the question. Are you gonna keep telling yourself comforting stories? Or are you gonna embrace the Truth without hesitation? Truth can cause a lot of turmoil to the person that's the obstacle to enlightenment. Does that mean that the Truth hurts? Or does it mean that the person must go away and allow space for Truth? Truth is not good, nor evil, nor neutral. Truth is just Truth.

I still think I understood what you meant initially. It's apparent that you aren't just mad at God for creating poverty and other "negative" things, but rather trying to convey a message. However, I was pointing at something else. What I'm trying to say is that God is not a sadist. Sadism is a projection from the human perspective. There's nothing personal between God and humans for it to be a sadist. That's all. And I agree with the rest of your comments.

That's the one question that would keep you stuck forever. Let it go. Because by staying, you're hurting the both of you more than you realise. If you don't, soon you're going to be depressed. Mark my words. And by the way, it sounds like you don't even contact her directly in real life. If that's the case, then I'd like to tell you that she's not vulnerable at all. She's taking good care of herself, and you're just imagining things and worrying like an idiot (sorry, that might be necessary to wake you up).

I'm guessing here, but calling God an asshole doesn't sound like forgiveness. It sounds more like submission by force.

Is he really a sadist? Or does the ego simply not want to submit? And no. God does not care about evolution either because there's no such thing as evolution.

@Carl-Richard then perhaps I misinterpreted what you said. I'm sorry.

I don't mean that. I mean people who have no idea about enlightenment whatsoever are the most enlightened. It's when they get infected with the concept and then become seekers is where all delusion resides. The concept of enlightenment is the main delusion that prevents enlightenment. Before enlightenment, that was enlightenment. After enlightenment, will be enlightenment. It's only during the seeking of enlightenment that it stops occurring. Quite ironic if you ask me, yet still necessary for God's evolution. Nothing is a waste, even delusion, especially delusion.

Yes. The most woke people I've interacted with have always been the most asleep. Ignorance is enlightenment in this sense. And half-enlightenment is where all delusion resides.

It's really tricky and it can be problematic and limiting to put things into these categories. Yes, we can say something is real because we experience it through our perceptions. But then we'd have to deny other phenomenon that cannot be experienced through perceptions, like gravitational waves, as unreal. You can already see how limiting that would be. The underlying meaning of real vs. unreal is deep and should be contemplated. How do you define what actually exists? It's not that simple. And you're better than that. The analogy still stands. You were saying that survival must mean that there is an external reality. The analogy says that internal vs. external is a conceptual layer over what reality is essentially prior to and independent of the concepts. Just because Mario has to survive in his dream world does not mean that his dream world is external or that it is "objective". See, from your pov, it's just a game/dream. But from Mario's pov, it's not. He's trying to survive because otherwise he would be dead and the game would end. His life would end but he does not know that he doesn't actually exist. He takes his life seriously because he thinks if it's over, then he's failed his mission (which implies that he believes the game still runs after he dies). Now, which pov is more comprehensive? And which one is more contracted?

I'm not denying that dreams are real. Real vs. unreal is a conceptual layer over what reality is essentially prior to and independent of the concepts. It's an analogy. Mario is not our concern here. I'm trying to draw a connection for you via metaphors. Mario is you. Super Mario World is reality. Mario is not separate from Super Mario World. They're one package.

Super Mario has to distinguish between coins and turtles so that the game can still be running. But that doesn't mean that there's a 'Mario world out there'. It's just a dream.

Dude, you have no idea. Seriously. I've lived in a complete non-dual state for a couple of months last year. It was all about surrendering. The depth of pleasure that I've experienced is beyond description. I'd given up all my desires and merged with God. There was only love. I'd never really tasted food before! I'd never really watched a sunset before! Dude, I'm telling ya. There was nothing but pleasure. It was pure paradise. Every day I would go for a walk and melt from the love and beauty that I'd experience. But you're right that spirituality exists for this reason. It's not that I decided to become hedonistic. But rather that I'd given up everything, literally. I'd given up life, and I got paradise in return. Now I'm far from there. It took me a huge amount of suffering to get me to surrender to that level. My ego had to be broken and humiliated until annihilation. If I could have my life figured out right now, I would try to attempt another enlightenment experience.

To your imagination, duh! ?

There was a great thread here: But it does not work anymore. Here's its individual link: Secrets Of Concentration - Part 1 I wonder if @Leo Gura can do something about it to make it work. It was a really juicy thread.

It does not matter at all. The question is whether or not you desire to fly. This is completely up to you.

Consciousness (Infinity) is beyond language. It's an intuitive meta cognition. Being conscious (aware) of something is not the same as it existing. "Consciousness" is just a label. It's not necessarily conscious (aware). It can be dumb, e.g. a rock, and it can be aware, e.g. a human. It doesn't necessarily have to have qualities (limitations), and it can have all sorts of qualities. Of course.

Experience does not mean existence. That's the mistake. Existence is infinite. Experience isn't.

My result; https://www.truity.com/personality-test/17372/test-results/20149459 Type 9 sounds accurate.

Don't be afraid of death. Fear of death keeps you a caterpillar. If you want to become something beautiful like a butterfly, you gotta let go of your fears.

@Mert That's called "the hard problem of science". There's no other way around it than to ground yourself in your own truth. Except that you can ground yourself in someone else's truth too. It works both ways. It's all up to you (said me ?) ☯️

Use your body as a compass. Learn how to interpret the signals that your body sends out to you. If you feel tired, go to sleep. If you feel hungry, go and eat until the feeling is gone. If you feel energetic, do some exercise. Sometimes if you feel low on energy, an exercise could spark you up. This is a delicate work that you should pay close attention to. You don't want to become a lazy bum and you don't want to burn yourself out. How do you know what your balance is? Your body is always talking to you, but are you listening? Also, for you to enjoy life, you don't have to choose playing all the time over working. That's not what happiness is. You may desire playing all the time at the moment because you've never done it before, but the moment you have the ability, you will find out that it's empty and not what you actually want. It's a mechanism of the mind for procrastination. Kinda like if I was a kid and you told me to say anything but "dam ba dam", I would likely desire saying it for no reason (just to be free). So, the point is, don't expect that the lifestyle that you want must be free from work. A limited amount of work is healthy, and a limited amount of playing is healthy too, but you won't know how much you need via thinking, because your body knows better. You should also develop healthy habits, like meditation, stretching, exercise, etc... until they become part of your life and psyche. It will be difficult at first, but it's worth it.

It definitely could, but it depends on the person. If I was hedonistic and enlightened, then yes, it would. If I was ignorant like most people, then no, it would lead to hell. I have tested it personally. I lived like that for a few months in the last year, and I would have never asked for more. I could have lived like that forever. Right now, I'm not enlightened like I was last year, so it would take some effort to get there. But the key is enlightenment, not hedonism. Even though enlightenment has a lot to do with your lifestyle. You know, it's much easier to be enlightened when you don't have to worry about your business and other things.

@freeman194673 I apologise I assumed you were coming merely from a scientific place; It's just the theme of materialistic people that I know of. But you're still equating cocaine with porn like that's been proven. And you're definitely misinterpreting the scientific evidence you've presented. Correlation does not equal causation. That's a basic trap that lots of materialists fall into (partly why I assumed you were a materialist). You can draw whatever conclusions you want from the correlations, but they won't be anywhere near accurate. The reason I don't buy into this is because my experience says otherwise. Call it my bias or whatever, but everyone is responsible for themselves. And like Leo said, if you can't handle porn, that's your problem.

@VeganAwake You get it, sir! ???

But you're scientific, and you'd listen to science over your own body. You'd shut your eyes to your own truth and take what science is telling you. I understand what you mean and I use that language rather loosely. That's rather a long article. It could take a lot of time to read and check out the resources and their validity, but nevertheless I've skimmed through the headlines and found this one interesting: “I believe it is wrong but I still do it”: A comparison of religious young men who do versus do not use pornography (2010) I could only think of this as a self-fulfilling prophecy kind of thing. If you believe porn is bad for your health, then it will become so. This is not exclusive to religious people. It could very well apply to scientific people like yourself who believe that science gives you the truth. And by the way, correlation does not mean causality. Just because there appears to be correlations between consuming porn and some negative things doesn't mean that porn is causing them neither directly nor indirectly. In fact, that also dismisses a lot of other factors, including psychological, like deep unconscious beliefs. Also, similarly, we could say the same things about the internet, phones, computers, TVs, video games, etc... These are all new technologies that I think there is a calibration process happening. At all times, people find things to attach to in order to fill out their spare time with. Before the invention of these modern technologies, people used to be addicted to story-telling. I remember my grandmother used to memorise lots of stories (she lived in early radio days), a skill I don't find necessary in our time. I'm sure there were other things to be addicted to before that. I guess that's just the nature of human beings. There's always a void that we try to fill. But you can't blame the filler. You should instead blame the human. I don't rarely consume porn. I watch some every other day, like for 30 to 60 minutes every couple of days. It has its place in my sketchy schedule, but I don't consider myself addicted to it. I just use it as a tool when I feel my body needs it. Everything has its pros and cons. If the cons outweigh the pros, then that's a problem. For me, porn is the best alternative to having to be stuck in a relationship or in chasing one just to fulfil a basic need. I need that time and focus to be directed towards other important things for me. Although, I admit, maybe this easy access is somewhat of a problem for our rewarding psychological systems. Then again, that could be the case with sex in long-term relationships/marriages. Besides, I am still able to work effectively, so that's a non-issue. In fact, I can be more focused than if I was deprived all the time.