Zion

Perhaps you're confusing material expression with embodiment & self-understanding, as not everyone outwardly expresses what they embody & understand within themself.

@Leo Gura Interesting, I guess we'll see if anyone comes to meet those qualifications by means of coincidence. Wonder how you measure how deeply someone understands something, & how you compare it to that of your own.. How you understand the depth of understanding; I suppose thats the true determiner of whether you can see one's true experience of god. I'm sure we'll eventually get more in-depth content from you explaining more about what you see understanding to be & why you value it as such. That will be very helpful in the determining of how full of shit you are

It seems for someone to seemingly understand what GOD is to you, they must not need to speak it at all, or they need to articulate it in such a way when speaking/writing, that it is either better explained than you or insightful to your understanding of GOD.

(Of course rooting mainly from logic & reason here) I see what's going on here. If all is one, then there can only be one; that is the mindset that being one has. How is it's material form to relate to other perceived-material- beings that don't share the same understanding it has in this way? Especially when the mindset & understanding is so profoundly different than that of everyone around them? How are they then going to tell if anyone is truly awake in the same way? Perhaps thats a potential flaw/feature in your delineation of determining whether someone is truly awake or not. Still clearly feels like potential omniscience funneled through an immature ego, but hey who truly knows. Only those who seek the absolute truths within themselves with complete open-mindedness I suppose.

Why does that then mean that no one else can be truly awake other than you? Are you saying for one to be god; to enter omniscience, no one else can be? And of course if you are all, given that you're god, then it sounds like you've created a cycle of convincing yourself you are right about virtually anything you decide to be true; such that you can no longer see another perspective & truly determine that you're right. Only merely give faith to the perspective you preach & teach to others is true, by previous means of solidifying your perspective of what's true through psychedelics & meditation. What is it you're still searching for if you are omniscient? What are you doing here? You may say something like "living", "having fun", "exploring", & if that's the case, then all of this is purposeless & you trying to pierce/share your perspective into the world with no end-agenda or true purpose other than to lead people closer to your perspective using your ego. Meaning you're just lost & sharing your journey with us of the path you take. And if thats the case, then you are completely full of shit. Not meaning you are wrong, but if you're right; dam is that a difficult thing to just accept. How do you know that this is even the right method of determining what's absolutely true? Intuition? Faith? It seems only to be a perspective that can't quite be fully adapted by any other one person, so what's the point of looking to you for or as anything? After all, it's your perspective, no one else's. No one has that same perspective as they don't have the same material life you have. How is anyone to become truly awake if they aren't you or have your exact perspective? It seems like a lonely world to live in Leo, materially. As one may always be craving to preferably perceive themselves as the infinity that they see themselves to be truly, always seeking to escape the material life. What is the then-point of living a material life? And clearly when I'm asking these questions, I'm asking you personally. How are you embodying these understandings without completely being destroyed materially? I suspect these are some harsh truths, & difficult truths at that, for a material life to take on long-term. What are you holding onto? What is keeping you here? Principle? Have you convinced your body to enjoy the embodiment of these truths? Are you becoming increasingly crippled from embodying these truths? Are you trying to figure out a way to live materially with the truths of the infinite, in a wise & fulfilling way, as to teach that way to others? What is it you want in this material life Leo? I haven't ruled out that you are wrong, I'm curious about your perspective. I'm literally trying to imagine if an omniscient being was trapped inside of a material world, a material being called "Leo". And if this Leo was completely aware of this being the case as well, I'm trying to imagine all of the possible ways it would be conveyed/expressed through exclusive material expression. I suppose it's difficult to accept a life which has no decided purpose or decided value. Either way, I have a feeling you're on the right track, don't know how far right, but you're leading somewhere potentially very true.

Granted I'm open to the possibility that what you say is the case; is true. How did you come to this conclusion? Thats quite a remarkable assumption. And extremely difficult to not see that you have become stagnated in a perpetual cycle of egocentric delusion. How do you determine whether someone/something is awake? How do you compare your wake with another's, with such true precision? Why is it not harmful/unhealthy to have this mindset of seeing yourself as the only person awake? What is your goal/purpose/intention of this post? What is the lesson to be learned from your being the only one awake? What is the meaning of you telling everyone this, you can clearly see how posting this can be seen as braggadocious & extremely egocentric? Such an isolated perspective, how is this to bring a healthy community here? If the intention isn't a healthy community, what is the point of the forum then? To have all of us realize the same thing as you & eventually part ways? To use as a resource to further help you egotistically understand reality? Such an isolated perspective, if this post isn't for the sake of the community here; what is the point of it?; how is it intended to help you?; what is it doing for you? I'm genuinely interested in the answers to these questions, this is not intending to be seen as offensive to then isight combative arguments rooted in pure emotion.

@Leo Gura Who do you consider to be awake other than you that is outside of this forum?

This video changed my perspective of self-love: Time Stamp: 3:48-9:04

If you fear something, is the fear true? Not "is the fear valid?", yes of course it's valid. Is the thing you fear true? Is it truly something that is to be feared? What makes something worthy of fear? What makes something fear? What makes fear, fear? What is fear? What distincts fear from anything else? What values does fear have? How do you find out what you fear? How do you find out why you fear it? What is not fear?

As someone who relates heavily to you, by matter of being prone to addiction. The way to relieve addiction is to change your understanding of: - What addiction is - What procrastination is - What discipline is Through experience, patience, & deliberate practice. Here's my new-found understandings of these things since relieving several addictions I struggled with for most of my life: * Addiction: Addiction surrounds you already as everything you do. You're addicted to something either way. Love is arguably an addiction to that which you favor in life. It's a matter of how much you're addicted to something. Ask yourself; "why am I more addicted to this more so than other things?" "What is so special about this thing I'm addicted to?" Genuinely looking for a truthful answer. * Procrastination: Procrastination is underdeveloped self-discipline. Notice that you have some things that you are good at disciplining to; ie drinking alcohol. But other things, you struggle to discipline as much. Asking yourself "Why" in this scenario is helpful, but only helpful for partial understanding of the unwanted addiction you face. If you want to know why you are addicted to something truthfully, you must practice self-discipline; looking for other methods to change your addiction beforehand is futile as it either doesn't work or gives you very unsatisfactory temporary results. * Discipline: Theres a quote I love that changed my perspective on discipline a while back; "Discipline will take you places motivation can't". Self-discipline doesn't require motivation; it is what creates motivation. If you consistently practice discipline, even with potential hurdles along the way, you will learn why it is important to relieving & understanding your addiction. The discipline will become like a habit that you've always had. It will also force you to replace the unwanted addiction with a favorable one that is healthy to you; as you will naturally gravitate towards something in exchange when first starting self-discipline. What self-discipline reveals is that you are able to trust yourself, that you respect yourself, as before; the addiction was the excuse you used to justify your lack of self-trust. It's quite ironic & backwards, the mind is remarkably good at sticking to addiction/comfort for sake of comfort & habit, but the one area it struggles to give a worthy excuse to is discipline. Because discipline is an in-the-moment thing: you either do it or you don't. That moment may feel as though it lasts for a while at first, but discipline takes care of that. When you have that thought-process of "I'll do it later" or "I'll stop tomorrow" or "Just this once" or "Just one more" or "I'll have to ____ anyways, so I might as well" etc, AKA; of procrastination, you need to practice seeing & feeling the craving in your mind & doing nothing about it; just seeing it, acknowledging it, & letting it be, without entertaining it's practicality. It's like when you're working out; feeling the toughness & difficulty of it, acknowledging it, & still pushing on for the sake of pushing on; doing it anyways. You have to do it for sake of discipline, there's no way around it. Discipline is self-trust, built it & you will be unstoppable with anything you put your mind to or don't put your mind to.

What is power? Is it attained? How is it attained? What defines power? What is strength? How is power valued? Is power created? What creates power? How is power created? What distinct something as having power?

"Cheating" implies monogamy. I find that, while currently socially accepted because of history, monogamy isn't the healthiest form of a relationship. Both men & women tend to still find people other than their partner attractive, weather they deny it or not. Those who fall in line with monogamy rather than polygamy tend to be those who get jealous easily in one way or another, which to me says they are not quite emotionally mature enough for a full-on relationship. You may argue that people who are polygamous are the immature ones because they find it easy to detach/separate-themselves from people emotionally, sexually, or otherwise. Though healthy polygamy is when there is ease of presence with those involved, not detachment. I think monogamy is good if you struggle with self-discipline, as it will force you to grow there. To me, those who cheat are those who struggle to express what they want & fail to understand why it is they want it. So long as there is presence, true understanding of each other & of oneself, & love/acceptance within the relationship, cheating will cease to exist. My take is that if you both have such a deep love & deep understanding of one another, in a healthy way, you are bound to have sexual opportunities that you would happily take advantage of if you so wished, as jealousy doesn't cross one another's mind. If exclusive sex is what holds the glue of the relationship together, what is the true point of the relationship other than sex? Sex is a powerful tool for deep communication to create connection. A connection isn't lost just because sex is had with someone else, that only happens when the connection has an unhealthy sexual attachment to one another; meaning those involved aren't present & loving with each other far beyond the sex. The point is; if so many monogamous relationships nowadays are held together primarily by the sex & not true love & presence beyond that, it will be difficult to abstain from having sex with other people; as opportunities are abundant & sex only goes so far to hold a relationship together. All of this of course, is dependent on how you value sex in a relationship. If one doesn't value sex that much, then of course there isn't that big of an inclination to be polygamous. If you struggle to be attracted to many people outside of your relationship, then clearly there isn't that big of an inclination to be polygamous. I personally see polygamy to be more wise, as it allows for freedom & true understanding of one another, because all monogamy is is "I love you so long as you are exclusive to me & me only". And if one in this kind of a relationship had a desire to fuck another person, they would no longer be loved. So who is it that is loved here? The facade of someone you want them to be or who they truly are? Was it real love to begin with or just unhealthy sexual obsession? And yes, clearly I'm implying that most everyone, at least in the western world, values sex quite a bit & because of it; seeks it in multiple people overtime even when in a monogamous relationship. Basically cheating comes from valuing sex too much, someone's lust in the relationship is out of balance with their love. Thats fine if there's communication on that front, but often times there isn't because lust is often confused with love; aka why there is so much cheating. From my experience, men seemingly value sex a lot more so than women, I don't know how true it is given; the hyper-sexualization of everything nowadays & the shame society places on sex & its counterparts. Theres a lot of things to consider. Overall though, as a man, I think inherently we value sex just as much as women do, there is just a heavy imbalance of lust over love in varying degrees amongst both the sexes, & I think women value sex to the same degree as men; but in a different way.

What is dominance? What defines dominance to you? What does it mean for someone to be dominant over/towards another?

What are some clear & concise definitions of what toxic masculinity is? What makes masculinity toxic? What makes masculinity healthy? What is healthy masculinity? What does that look like? What is toxic femininity? What is healthy femininity? What do these look like & how are they different?

This would imply that men & women are constantly changing from masculine to feminine & vise versa. Are you saying that, in truth, there is no masculine & feminine? It seems with the understanding above, everyone is just as masculine as they are feminine; as they are both displaying the same traits of the other to gain the other's attraction. Meaning there is no true definition of masculine or feminine, there is just attraction by means of the system the sexes live in together.

@Roy So by this definition, healthy masculinity is the equal or morally-respected use of power? And if that's the case, then there is only "Linity" as appose to masculinity & femininity, & the toxic version of either one is the abuse of the power, given the circumstances by either one. This way we categorize toxic femininity as unhealthy women & toxic masculinity as unhealthy men, simply put. And for both to stay healthy, they must be in harmony with one another; compliment one another. So it all comes down to what the society & culture at-large thinks is morally just & true. That is what determines the respect each sex gives to one another & explains why ways of sexual attraction are so diverse amongst men & women; why people can be attracted to very different things. If this is all true, then the real question to be asking is what is morally right? What kind of world-system is ideal for this healthy pairing? Perhaps there is toxic femininity & toxic masculinity because there is so much overstimulation of everyone, to the point that men & women look for the extreme version of what society & culture deems attractive, given the world-system they are in. And with that, there are only so few options of these extreme desirable traits, & rarely are these traits attached to a man or woman that is genuinely healthy. Interesting perspective.

@gettoefl Interesting interpretation. Why is it a social construct? What is the opposition to this that is healthy?

It really is this easy. Love life & effort feels nearly effortless.

@Nilsi I love that definition. Very thought-provoking. So meaning; choosing for them? When being dominant is when you are making choices for them?

As a general consensus, most men, because of immaturity, think they "love" women, but they actually like them for their bodies more often than for WHO THEY ARE; meaning they literally like them AS A BODY. There is an even balance of pros & cons for being either sex, the disparity between one another's ease & difficulties is dependent upon the society/world-system they live in together. We often take for granite what we have; there are many things a man has that a woman will never have & vise-versa. There is nothing wrong with this, it's what makes us so intriguing to one another as a species. It is through these appreciations of our differences that we are the same. Look for the sameness, that is what brings loving connection. Jealousy is envy coming from insecurity, you are jealous of something because you clearly don't like something about yourself & are instead looking to an outside source to replace/explain this self-determined bad thing about yourself. What is it that you feel you have, that you are, that isn't loved? Self-love is what you lack. You're envious of women, but you're not a woman. How could you possibly know how great it really is? How bad it really is? I used to have this same jealousy of women for a bit, what I realized is I was replacing my attraction & curiosity of women with envy & jealousy; at those times of personal insecurity around women. Everyone is a lot more loving than you think, you just have to look for it; but it starts with you. For example; loving this jealous, depressed person that you're being right now that you may otherwise think not to love, & know that you will get passed it if you so wished. How are you gonna understand love from someone if you don't understand loving yourself? You might always be wondering whether you are loved or not, whether you are worth love. Be self-aware in every aspect you can, this will grant you better self-understanding, & self-love will naturally follow. Best of luck.

If we can answer the following questions below as a society, we will find a lot more common-ground & relatability between the sexes. If you would, please give any opinions, thoughts, insights, & ideas in your answers below. Let's get to some truths & find the things we couldn't previously understand about one another. Do your best to not use anything borrowed from others & instead use your own/personal thought-process to determine what it is you seek to explain. Thank you. As a general consensus, what does a woman generally need from a man & why? As a general consensus, what does a man generally need from a woman & why? Generally, what does a man not need or desire from a woman & why? Generally, what does a woman not need or desire from a man & why? Generally, what does a woman need & not need or desire from a woman & why? Generally, what does a man need & not need or desire from a man & why? See I came to these questions when I had the following thought-process; "Perhaps the wisdom of what is being taught in these red-pill communities & alike, is that woman seek a man for help with their emotional struggles that they do not understand, & they need a man for this, more often than not, because they’ve been taught all their life (until recently to some degree) that men are the authoritative figures, are the wisest, & are to be respected, & a woman is second to that. Whether this was taught consciously or unconsciously to them by means of society or parental figures is besides the point. A woman nowadays feels less powerful & less respected than that of a man, & so they struggle to truly uphold a strong front that presents a face of otherwise virtues. Now do women need a man to push past those emotional struggles indefinitely, through companionship or otherwise? That is the question isn't it. Me personally, I find that a woman only feels she needs a man if she cannot support herself fully, emotionally. Or because she is not satisfied sexually on her own. I have much to learn & experience still. Does a woman need a man to always be there to alleviate her emotional & overall mental struggles? Have men truly given women the chance to alleviate her emotional & mental struggles on her own? Why or why not?" Of course, you may be seeing the obvious subtle message as I am here, being that human beings seeks company. They seek togetherness. Because if all the emotional & mental struggles were alleviated & all the sex was attained for everyone involved on planet Earth, what would we then crave after the fact? Togetherness? Company? Growth? Love? Let's here your your interpretations...

Seriously, what is masculinity? What do you view masculinity to be? What is your definition? What is femininity? How do you define it? I think masculinity is the presumptions of what a specific biological male ought to be for the sake of a specific biological female, given the intuitions that have collectively created society's norms. Is masculinity only there when femininity is present? And if so, what is a human-being's role in civilization without either present? If masculinity is always present even without femininity, then what role/function does it play then for society at large? Why have masculinity? Why have femininity? Why are they important? What do either do for humanity? How to they work together, such that they supposedly help to create a balanced & healthy society/civilization? What is important to you if you are masculine? What is important to you if you are feminine? It seems to me that what society says is being masculine is to be an impactful leader/force to the world. And to be feminine is to be one who chooses & steers that leadership's direction. These definitions still don't really explain what either of them are really or why they are important, or if they are true. What are they? If they are subjective, who are the ones who decide on it's definition for the collective as a whole? Who are the ones who society deems to have immense masculinity & femininity? Are femininity & masculinity just ideals for a world enthralled by it's personal fantasies? How true & real are these things if societal norms are taken away, if civilization is taken away, etc? What does that look like? Perhaps masculinity & femininity is the outward expression of what it feels like to interpret & be the way you are, given your body & environment? And whatever comes with that outward expression more so than others, is deemed favorable & true as appose to other's expressions. Meaning masculinity is constantly changing by means of its ability to impact the world in an attractive way to that of the feminine. And vise versa with feminine. So now the question becomes; what does society & the modern world generally view the most masculine traits to be? What does society & the modern world generally view the most feminine traits to be? Which traits are more favorable societally & culturally than others, by means of popular vote? What determines the change in attraction for each polarity? What is being sought after by each polarity at the core of each favorable attribute? What is the end goal of each one's desire? Is there something each one is seeking beyond just fun & enjoyment; as that is what relationships & humanity's mentality seems to be. We're all just fucking around, having fun, seemingly seeking to progress our evolution & status without any purpose other than for the fun of it, for the hell of it.

@Leo Gura Honestly, why pursue a life with an anti-human mentality? After all, it is what you live your life through until it dies. Humans are just as much truthful as anything else. Perhaps you are just bored, or maybe not satisfied with the conclusion you've come to in life so far.

I'd like to get your perspective of how you interpret the red pill community with potential insights of the black pill community as well, & the what both of them get right & wrong in your eyes. What does the red pill community get right? What does the red pill community get wrong? What does the black community get right? What does the black pill community get wrong? What truths are underlying both of these communities, that is failing to be seen? What important things are ignored in these communities? What is wrong with the red pill community? What is right with the red pill community? What is wrong with the black pill community? What is right with the black pill community? I'd like to play devil's advocate & god's advocate here, really getting to the bottom of what there is to learn amongst these communities. Thank you for any shared perspectives.

Why be empathetic? What are the pros & cons? It's an ironic question, I know, given the fact that I'm seeking perspectives of others on a question that I would otherwise answer myself if it were not for my interest & ability to empathize with others. My question however is; "To what degree is it wise to be empathetic to others?" "How necessary are high levels of empathy in a collective?" "What is the difference between empathy, selfishness, & selflessness? Looking back on it, it seems as though any time I've been empathetic to someone, its been for personal gain in the long run. So was I truly empathetic? Is there even such a thing as absolutely true empathy? It seems, similar to many others I've talked to, that I manipulate others in such a way that it is seen as empathy, when in reality it's a facade/societal-mask that I put up to eventually gain something out of selfishness. Even if it's as simple as helping an elderly neighbor with some groceries. I'm doing that to paint a nice picture in the eye of society & now in-turn making myself feel good, but if I gained nothing from that interaction, I wouldn't care to help; as it doesn't appeal to my survival needs of selfishness. What does this say? Perhaps empathy shouldn't be something to flaunt, but rather to distribute wisely. There is a wisdom in segregating your empathy to those things that appeal to your life values & standards. It's funny, you may see this as a very different perspective, given that I am basically asking; "How can I use empathy for selfish gain in a way that appeals to my egocentric needs?" but I am also asking; "What is the alternative to this?" "Is true empathy actually an absolute truth & if so; how is one to truly be empathetic, because I'm tired of 'acting' for the sake of the collective." Of course I'm tired, the ego is inherently selfish, so it doesn't want to keep wasting its time needlessly empathizing with others, especially in a society & culture that isn't often very cognizant of it's own emotional, & overall mental well-being. Of course you could also argue that I am not truly being empathetic because if I were, I would truly understand where everyone's at in life & I wouldn't feel the need to ask how to distribute my empathy. But that's exactly my point; is true empathy possible? Granted if it is possible, I'd admittedly struggle to get to that point, if I so wanted to. Because clearly I've learned some childhood pattern of thinking thats contributed to my now understanding of empathy differently than that of others. Or perhaps I'm confusing empathy with something else. Feel free to respond with your thoughts & ideas, I'd love to hear some other perspectives (for the manipulative gain of my ever-growing self-understanding known as the ego. But of course, the goal is to psychologically trick the ego into dismantling it's current way of function in order to later fully understand itself.)