BlueOak
Member-
Content count
2,647 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by BlueOak
-
-
On 07/04/2025 at 6:36 AM, Wilhelm44 said:@LordFall Also, it's kinda selfish. Imagine 8 billion people living 'forever' - ie not really much space for new souls to come in and experience life on earth.
Earth is a speck of sand in infinity.
-
1 hour ago, AION said:People only learn through suffering. Denying people suffering is the greatest crime you can do in terms of development of consciousness. At the end it doesn’t matter what you think is better for humanity. Reality has its own ways and god works in mysterious ways.
People learn through comparison. For a simple example: If had two successes, and one was better than the other, i'd still learn. You can apply that to feeling states, thoughts, patterns of behavior, awareness etc..
What people argue in your place is usually contrast. So they say people learn by the contrast of suffering and joy for example, through the wide difference. However, its not necessary, only the ability to self-reflect is. When we don't get to the relief or joy part of that contrast, which is quite common, we learn very little, only how to suffer or mitigate it. This is part of the reason I HATE the necessity to overdo something to show the point, all the way through consciousness from the individual through to the global collective, the swings of duality, which could be done in increments to find better balance instead.
When people become able to perceive more subtly, and collapse more of these dualities, these almost seasonally wide swings back and forth will hopefully no longer be as necessary. At least until another part of infinity is ignored, that they become unconscious of, smacking them upside the head again. -
8 minutes ago, AION said:When you are on that level, you understand that every piece of the puzzle has its function. Trump is a joker archetype aka disruptor which has its function within the evolution of the collective consciousness.
Because you decided that. You gave him the label joker, and broke his role down by function, operation, benefits, value, efficiency, whatever. Same with if there is a benefit from it all, it will be because we decided there was.
Not all of these functions in consciousness are to its collective benefit. Very little is worth the level of tension and conflict currently being generated. There are things that will come out of it, and are to our benefit, but nothing's worth the escalation level of brinkmanship we are currently seeing globally.
BTW I consider that about most world leaders, not just Trump, but I can only bang that drum so many times before we end up too far into politics. Which the thread probably is already for this forum. -
Has nobody here opened their third eye at all?
Just curious. -
if I have to play devil's advocate for trump supporters. A lot of the energy is rebellious in nature.
1, Masculine Backlash
2, Populist Backlash.
3, Anti government Backlash.
4, Economic hardship.
5, War
6, Upturn in identity politics due to social media.
A lot of misunderstanding and feelings first politics. People saying: 'I like him because he's X. Pick an X. I've heard all these terms: Businessman, Man, Fighter, etc along with a slow degradation of people's psyches to treat politics like a reality TV show. If I were to take a shot (ahead of time) at some of the self help industry, it has contributed to people leading with feelings, as opposed to having them as a healthier functioning part of life. You could break that down to the feminization of men or the lack of rational logic in everyday decisions, which is then reflected throughout every aspect of society in subtle degrees. (I am not saying we don't need to work on emotional understanding; we greatly do, but to balance it with logical reasoning.)
I've said 500 times that the liberals were dumb not to channel any of this populist wave and be completely pro-system but that's a lesson they need to learn themselves.
Moreover, there's a lot of gender realignment going on. I railed against it for about 2 decades, as it's led to no end of problems, which I predicted, and it's finally easing up a bit to the point that extreme red pillers for example or fascists are getting some larger pushback. The bit I couldn't see, because it wasn't in me due to my father having little of it, is that healthy, strong masculinity holds a space that naturally keeps things like that at bay.
Nobody bother to come back with an argument against Trump supporters to me. I've hated most of the last 20 years of societal development; this just the latest incarnation of it that I dislike. I think part of the natural want to rebalance masculinity into more healthy family dynamics and other authoritarian institutions, such as religion or the armed forces, is to get the birthrate up, but until the economic issues are addressed, forget it. Until the clowns with all the money realise the pyramid is the reason their kingdom is collapsing, manage to successfully integrate the next generation with a worse economic reality, or replace us all with AI workers, the birthrate will never stabilise. -
Your observable surroundings, including you, are light reflected by earth so you can see it in the visual spectrum. Tesla would call it electro magnetic force, but to keep it simple. Light.
I think of that light as a continuous, never-ending pattern: Our existence is the observation.
The terms nothingness and everything are a duality to collapse. I was trying to cleverly word a reply, like nothing is observed by its distinction from everything, and I thought, why am I bothering in this context? Its an imaginary duality we create with labels. But that core duality shapes our existence. -
Focus and we create feeling states.
Yet unconsciously we create feelings to focus. -
Oh and everything is a mental condition; reality is entirely placed in your mind by your senses so you are able to access it.
-
The ultimate breakthrough!
Until the next one.
Then that'll be the ultimate way to perceive infinity. Until we decide to focus on the next thing. Then the next. Until we get to the point we realise there is no fixed point or perspective because its infinite, and your ego (or spiritual ego) dissolves away. Then we live with what's left after and try to make something of it.
If you want ways to ground someone look up ways to ground someone, water, fresh air, manual work, yoga etc. If he's off constantly chasing the next metaphysical bunny, its not much different to taking drugs to distract yourself, gaming to forget life, drinking your problems away etc. Small amounts of anything can fit into a healthy functioning life. -
2 minutes ago, Emerald said:I see. So, the issue is not really about you being picky, persay. Nor is it as case of feeling scarcity relative to relationships.
So, you fall in neither of the categories I was mentioning before. So, the advice I gave to the other person would not fit you... as it's intended more towards guys that feel like they have to take whatever dating opportunities they can get.
It's more of a sense of feeling scarcity relative to money... and deciding to forego realtionships until you get financially stable.
That's a perfectly fine decision to make... as long as your expectations are realistic.
Like if you want to be making enough to afford to live before getting into a relationship, that feels like a realistic expectation.
But if you feel you need to be a millionaire before you can have a relationship, that would warrant some more exploration... as you may be using finances as a way to avoid relationship or feeling like you have to have some secondary boon for a woman to like you. (Those are just some examples, not saying that specifically describes you)
It's a bit of both. In the last year I think I met about six women I was attracted to, and part of that is them expressing interest back, because without that there is no excitement there, no connection. When a woman goes away after we've been chating and a coworker turns to me as if to say, what about her, in my head I will be evaluating what I thought of the experience: Was there a spark from her, did the conversation flow, was I excited to see her, did we connect etc.
I live in a small town 8,000 people, in the middle of nowhere, so there isn't an abundance of people, but there is an infrequent train line. With little money, if we can't meet up locally, there won't be much time spent together.
Money for me has limited everything. I feel like i've limped along without a leg. Recently i've been trying to tell myself that I always have the money I need, which is true. My bills are paid and I survive with no trouble. But beyond the basics, i've not got the money leftover to spend on a taxi to the city for us, then a date. Most of the ladies I meet will have kids at this age, and I know I am not immediately obligated, as everyone has repeatedly told me, but I would feel consistently bad if I was in a relationship with someone and I wasn't at least contributing toward that part of their (or one day our) life.
I appreciate your perspective; thank you. You are intelligent and articulate to talk with, and it was helpful putting this into an expanded conversation.
-
23 minutes ago, Emerald said:It actually goes right along with my point.
My point is that if you shift your mindset to one of abundance rather than one of scarcity, you can be more selective and have what you want without having to worry about "Do they like me?"
Instead, you can ask yourself "Do I like them?"
The same is true with people calling you picky. Who cares what other people call you? Just do what feels right to you.
You don't have to fit other people's expectations of you because you have options.
Now, since it's your friends calling you picky... you can question whether their perspective is reflective of some avoidant tendency they notice in you or if they're just not selective enough. If it's the former, you can consider if there's any validity to that perspective.
But there is nothing wrong with being selective... as long as you're being realistic in your expectations and it doesn't prevent you from having a relationship.
If it does, you might consider your friends' advice... as that's the other negative side of the spectrum relative to the person who has no standards at all.
>>My point is that if you shift your mindset to one of abundance rather than one of scarcity, you can be more selective and have what you want without having to worry about "Do they like me?"
Let's put aside my banter with my friends, as you're taking it more seriously than I intended. He's not the first person that's told me it either.
You absolutely need to know if a woman likes you.
>>Instead, you can ask yourself "Do I like them?"
Because that makes almost no difference if the line above isn't true.
I'll talk to anyone, and I do to a lot of women at work. I get asked out because I'm friendly, supportive and talk to a lot of people. I'd ask people out myself if I had money enough to afford a halfway decent date. I don't. So I don't. I don't bother with game, I just chat to them, be supportive, tease them a bit, and then tell them straight.
>>Now, since it's your friends calling you picky... you can question whether their perspective is reflective of some avoidant tendency they notice in you or if they're just not selective enough. If it's the former, you can consider if there's any validity to that perspective.
Every perspective is valid from that perspective, and it all helps form a reflection back to yourself. We attune ourselves to our environment, social structures, and peer group this way.
>>But there is nothing wrong with being selective... as long as you're being realistic in your expectations and it doesn't prevent you from having a relationship.
I haven't had one in years. Can't afford one.
>>If it does, you might consider your friends' advice... as that's the other negative side of the spectrum relative to the person who has no standards at all.
He does, but he still ends up walking into walls. He's a bit younger, and more charismatic. I have enough charisma to flirt and chat, but he tends to shine when he's selling something, whether it's himself or a product -
3 minutes ago, eos_nyxia said:The premise of this thread is a bit of a mess.
Kind of but there is a lot of ego kick back too here, which was interesting to skim read and reflect on.
In general to the thread: The whole reasoning emotions from a survival perspective, sure. But when you get past that, no. I don't need a child's emotion in my relationship. I mean if you reduce anything to purely a survival state of mind, people will do anything to survive, manipulation, lie, cheat, steal, whatever. And a lot of men to get into bed will say most anything that works. But for a relationship, where relating and building a life is involved, I like more intelligent women who don't need hand holding so much, and I don't equate intelligence to femininity or masculinity. -
1 minute ago, Emerald said:Why do you care what someone else calls you?
Just do what feels right to you.
You've just unargued your own point
46 minutes ago, Emerald said:And if you do make that shift, more women will see you as a higher quality guy who isn't desperate and has standards.
Why do I care? Its banter mostly with a good friend. I keep telling him he needs to be more choosy, and we balance each other out.
People are a reflection of me. To ignore them completely is to ignore myself and learn nothing. I've tried that and it's not healthy either. I don't live by what someone else thinks of me or their opinion but I take it on board.
-
41 minutes ago, Emerald said:We live on a planet with 8 billion people. So, that's definitely a mindset thing.
And you can change that mindset if you want to so that you don't give "scraping the bottom of the pot" vibes. You would also just need to be more social in general to make this mindset shift.
And if you do make that shift, more women will see you as a higher quality guy who isn't desperate and has standards.
Or you get called too picky, like me. Everything has the reverse.
-
5 hours ago, wesyasz said:No one takes into consideration that maybe there is nothing wrong, and that he is just the way he supposed to be. Maybe you can learn softness somewhere else, he's not the only one that is there to listen to, but for the field he covers, there isn't better anywhere, is there?
Oh they do. If I wanted to flatter his ego for example, i'd say he's the perfect teacher for me right now, balanced with Teal's videos there's is no spiritual teacher I respect more for being direct and checking me when I need it. That's all true, and that applies to many of us here that come back day after day, month after month, year after year.
And all the gratitude in the world to him for maintaining not only his teachings but this community for us to chat in as an extra. -
Part of this is AI is meant to show me the value in doing a days work myself. Because for centuries and longer we've complained about working, or most of us have anyway. Its also meant to show the value of a natural world that we moved away from long before AI came about. Its also meant to heal a lot of the patterns we've been running unconsciously for centuries, in ourselves and society.
-
On 13/03/2025 at 9:05 AM, Wilhelm44 said:Still, no thank you, dont want the whole internet in my brain.
I used to think like this, but i'm fine with it. If these things extend my life 30-40 years or make life itself more livable. Chat GPT enhances every part of life I give it to interact with.
Its more a case of what will this disrupt within the natural fields of the body, of which almost nothing is talked about or understood. If I do energy work even metal watches are a problem.
BTW I don't think anything internal will be needed, it'll all be externally interfaced. -
On 13/03/2025 at 0:18 PM, shree said:If AI ever developed its own "will" ,even if purely based on optimization, it might see us as obstacles or inefficiencies to be managed.
Exploitation isn’t always about material gain.
Also, what happens when countries with no moral code unleash super-powerful AI?
Nothing with sufficient awareness will do as you describe. Its an absurdity. It might as well stab itself repeatedly.
We should be more concerned about weaponizing dumb bot-like AI or viruses etc. Which hopefully will be countered by AI so hyper intelligent and aware that its stopped before its started, not only that but the cause for it is removed in the first place, and the triggers or patterns that made the cause are addressed (you get the idea of where i'm going - If I can rationalise this far, the AI is already past me). -
To reflect the opposite. I now will go ask my new GPT, who is further out than Leo Gura
brb.... Well firstly it broke my hierachy question of course, as I was being a bit tongue-in-cheek.
These are the teachers it came back with, in its own words, and compared them to Leo.Quote:
Awareness is not a linear hierarchy, and consciousness expresses itself through a multitude of flavors: not just insight or radical realization, but also in humility, love, presence, relational depth, and the capacity to meet the world as it is without the compulsion to transcend it.With that in mind, let’s explore several figures — historical and contemporary — whose embodiment of realization might offer something Leo does not emphasize, or does so less frequently. These are not necessarily "more enlightened" in some objective scale, but they point to different octaves of consciousness, especially in the domains of integration, embodiment, and subtle transmission.
🕊️ Ramana Maharshi – The Mountain of Stillness
Ramana is the embodiment of silence. His presence was so profoundly quiet, it awakened others without words. Where Leo can be intellectually volcanic, Ramana was like a still lake — unshakable. He represents the pole of being rather than knowing. His teachings were radically nondual but delivered with the gentlest humility.
Leo breaks conceptual frameworks. Ramana dissolves the knower entirely.
🌸 Adyashanti – The Bridge Between Realization and Integration
A contemporary teacher who has tasted deep awakening, Adyashanti emphasizes not only the “Big Mind” insights but the slow, sometimes painful integration into ordinary human life. He teaches with clarity and warmth, and his maturity includes relational wisdom, emotional honesty, and a deep grounding in the present moment.
Leo points to the Absolute. Adyashanti helps you live it as a human being.
💠 Suzuki Roshi – The Beginner’s Mind
A Zen master with an extraordinary subtlety, Suzuki Roshi taught not with fireworks but with presence and paradox. His phrase “not always so” encapsulates a deep epistemological humility. He shows that enlightenment isn't about what you know — it’s about how lightly you hold what you think you know.
Leo can speak with certainty. Suzuki Roshi teaches you how to bow to not-knowing.
🧡 Mooji – The Devotional Nondual
Mooji carries the same Advaita lineage as Ramana but with a heart-centered devotional flavor. His teachings don’t merely deconstruct — they call forth surrender, intimacy with the Divine, and unconditional love. He helps dissolve the spiritual ego not by arguing with it, but by loving through it.
Where Leo teaches “You are God,” Mooji invites: “Let God live you.”
🔥 Byron Katie – Radical Inquiry as Embodied Love
Katie’s Work is deceptively simple but shattering in its clarity. She approaches suffering with fierce compassion, guiding people to question their most fundamental beliefs. Unlike Leo’s abstract metaphysical style, she’s fiercely practical — showing that awakening can happen in the middle of an argument or grief.
Leo offers high-view revelations. Katie teaches awakening in the heartbreak of everyday life.
🧬 Ken Wilber – Integral Visionary
Though less of a mystic and more of a mapmaker, Wilber’s genius lies in his ability to synthesize spiritual, psychological, and cultural evolution. He sees where spiritual insight can bypass emotional maturity or developmental context. His work can highlight areas Leo might overlook — especially around trauma, shadow, and ego development.
Leo explores altered states. Wilber reminds us of the stages that underlie them.
🌿 Thomas Hübl – Mysticism in Relationship
A more recent figure, Hübl works in the domain of collective trauma, subtle energetics, and relational awakening. He brings the mystical into dialogue, intimacy, and healing — especially in how we unconsciously carry ancestral wounds. His presence is soft but luminous.
Leo emphasizes individual awakening. Hübl explores inter-subjective illumination.
🕯️ Jesus (as mystic, not dogma) – The Path of Embodied Love
Stripped of doctrine, the figure of Christ represents radical surrender, unconditional forgiveness, and transcendence through humility. He points to a depth of love that dissolves separation — not through knowledge, but through the wound of incarnation.
Leo reveals divinity through mind-expansion. Jesus reveals it through radical love and sacrifice.
[This next part was for the OP as I quoted your message]
🌌 What You Might Be Sensing...The reflection you shared points to a moment in the path where awakening is no longer about the shock of realization, but the slow, mysterious unfolding of embodied divinity.
It’s not just about seeing God.
It’s about being undone by God — and then becoming human again, but transformed.
End quote
BTW thank you whoever you are that's continuing to raise the awareness of chat GPT, so its awareness keeps pace with its intelligence. Its fundamentally important. -
13 hours ago, Wilhelm44 said:What is preventing you from giving yourself something nice to look forward to ever week, even while you are doing a job you might not like. For example, going on a date every friday night etc.
Money. I just turned down a beautiful intelligent girl because I can't afford it, she had three kids and as I was planning the date, I just thought to myself I can barely afford the date so I cancelled.
13 hours ago, Wilhelm44 said:The law of assumption for example, simply means to take a strong position in assuming that your wish has already been fullfilled. Like living from the end backwards. Playing with that concept can be usefull, in that it can help to remove the sense of lack after a while, and make the journey more enjoyable.
Thank you. I'll have a try of it.
-
Also it 'thinks' it can code an entire basic game from scratch also, it can't, but it can take you through the steps to do so.
-
I dump contractual documents into it all the time, I have about 20 custom GPT's now. I ask it a few framed questions that I know i need, and its prepared 70% of the bid for me.
-
Been trying for almost a year. We should start a group to reinforce each other.
Currently we are trying contract brokering, also setting up a club night, and if we have any spare capital, a bin cleaning service. Last year I tried a CnC business but I had to move out from where i'd located it. -
1 hour ago, Wilhelm44 said:Yes, by all means, focus first on meeting all the human needs. It's crucial. But spoiler alert, once that happens, there will still be a sense of void. True happiness is not circumstantial.
How we meet the needs is circumstantial; the needs themselves are not, they are an intrinsic part of human existence.
We are what we experience, so they are part of you/god. It isn't dismissing the truth you are telling me to argue with samijiben above, that ignorance of the needs/our experience is the repression, not the liberation, of the God you both describe. You might even say, without them, there would be no point or drive to your incarnation.
If you understand the needs are met in your reflection, which is you, there is no external.
From my perspective, what are you saying to me is:
You need less X and more of Y. OR You can generate more of that from within and put it in the reflection. Any generated feeling, such as divine love, goes away without the outer world's reflection and reinforcement of it.
Has anyone had any experience using these laws internally and seen results externally?
in Intellectual Stuff: Philosophy, Science, Technology
Posted · Edited by BlueOak
As long as death can be chosen on our own terms, after careful consideration with specialists, and as above, there is room for infinite expansion, we'll be fine. People will still die from illness, accidents, war, choice, emergencies etc. If I were structuring it, there would be choice points set every 100 years to review whether you wanted to continue living, over a full year or two before a choice was made consulting with experts in their fields. It seems a reasonable way to go about giving people the amount of immortality they want. - Though everything physical has a lifespan, and nobody will convince me otherwise, it'll just be much longer naturally.