DrugsBunny

Here's a woman who very believably claims to have permanently liberated herself from duality and all egoic suffering. I've listened to her for hours and she doesn't speak of the crazy peaks of God-Realization found on Actualize. This state of being seems to be the most desirable. My question, if it is even possible to answer, is why would I want temporary "deeper consciousness" over permanent liberation? @Leo Gura Perhaps you're not willing to expend the effort to carefully explain this as a mere forum post, but maybe you'd be willing to make a blog post that clears up your perspective on this.

@Tahuti @Leo Gura

@Leo Gura It would be worthwhile to hear an explanation on exactly why impermanent peaks of God-realization are better than a permanent liberation from the ego-mind. If I were given the choices to attain one for free, I would definitely pick the permanent no-self that Daniel Ingram talks about over the God peaks you discuss, but can you please explain why I'm supposedly wrong to do that?

@Leo Gura Honestly, isn't there a case to be made that permanent cessation of bothersome egoic identify is better than temporary glimpses into God-realization, even if those states are unspeakably good?

Where exactly have you seen any writing of his? This is a video.

I find it funny that your last post to me, less than 24 hours ago, was asking to "part ways" so as to avoid animosity, then immediately you impulsively liken me to this unhinged troll, which is clearly a satirical character being played as a joke that you didn't pick up on at first.

100% Correct. I like Leo's content, but his political takes consistently breed a festering cesspool of mindless followers who reflexively adopt his positions, as they feel sufficiently emboldened by brazenly deferring to the word of their enlightened master without second thought. I would have less contempt for this lazy deferential submission if it were being done towards Leo's spiritual perspective, but we commonly see people defer to this sycophantic negligence with respect to his politics, which are in no way strengthened by his supposed spiritual mastery. ____________________________________________________________________ Attempting to invoke a supporting perspective which already agrees with you while asking if you're being bad-faith is too much unintentional comedy for me to process, lol. Do you really not see that you're already bad-faith with this blatant appeal to authority? If you find it humiliating that I would respond by directly addressing your rhetorical short-comings, then perhaps that warrants further introspection on your end regarding why accurate descriptions of your conduct evoke such humiliation. Do you really think you have out-classed me with respect to argumentative hysterics? I'd like to remind you that you initiated this interaction by responding to my very tame post seen below -- "People knocked on doors, did canvasing and grassroots fundraising to get her elected. She betrayed the values she ran on, how is this not a traitor? I'm personally willing to call her far worse things than a traitor but lets just stick with that for now." -- which you responded with -- "Can you two pack it in with the bullying of moderate centrists? At this point you guys will never ascend to Spiral Dynamics stage yellow with all this demonizing, name calling and inflammatory use of language" -- Your unflattering denunciations of my character are fair play, claiming that my innocuous statement serves as a significant hindrance to my personal development, but if I follow suit with an appropriate response, this makes you "cognitively, morally, psychologically and intellectually superior". My only short-coming is that I would willingly defile my own integrity by awarding such asinine drivel with even my fleeting attention.

@Danioover9000 You posted this on my thread a couple days ago. Read it carefully and try to convince yourself that it makes even the least bit of sense. Ordinarily I wouldn't bring this up, but this literal coat-hanger abortion of an attempted cogent sentence perfectly encapsulates the insecurities of a desperately juvenile attempt to give the impression of far greater intelligence beyond what you actually have, which would explain why you resorted to the following nonsense seen below. It cannot be understated how nakedly embarrassing it is to reflexively cast people into some nebulous colors model as a makeshift cover to conceal a childlike inability to intelligently engage with the subject matter. You have won my 100th eye-roll of the day, sir. Congratulations. This is just juvenile, and my mental health has been sullied by even affording this any modicum of my attention. Do you actually believe you've exposed some weak point in my perspective by insisting that my response to an overtly negative event happening means that I'm "triggered" merely by posting a response? You would be seriously devastated (if it ever magically occurred to you) by the epiphany of how bafflingly unequipped you are to even participate in this discussion with the rest of us. Unironically about to adopt "You are so hubris" as an inside joke among some IRL friends, lol. Were you trying to outclass the incoherent drivel you vomited onto my thread a couple days ago?

Dunno why this popped up in my recommended videos, but this woman seems certain that Leo's "Infinity of Gods" Awakening was "lucifer" and not the "lord and savior". Supposedly, merging with another "sovereign" consciousness can only be demonic. The woman seems pretty sus, but I've definitely experienced negative entities, so it'd be worthwhile to hear a convincing refutation to this woman's ideas.

You'll be hard-pressed to attain a coherent answer on that from @Oeaohoo, the homophobic Q-anon tier conspiracy theorist butt-buddy of @AtheisticNonduality, who both collaborate off-forum specifically to call on one another to defend their posts by bolstering each other's positions so as to give the fabricated impression that their juvenile perspectives hold more merit than they actually have. This is why, out of the 4 distinct users who expressed alignment with my position, they both chose to go after me specifically -- because I am the one who called out @Oeaohoo's homophobic lunacy in another thread a week back. They will pretend to be "enlightened stage yellow systems thinkers", but if you look closely at their content, it is obvious they are very committed to pedantic posturing and pretentious side-stepping. Notice that @AtheisticNonduality responded to me with a verbose paragraph about the necessity to engage in cautious epistemic grounding, and claiming that I had missed the nuance being discussed, when if you go back and check, there was no such conversation taking place. He just wanted to use a pompous slew of impressive sounding words which hold no validity in context with my post. Don't be deceived, these people are the lowest of the low intellectually.

Do you actually listen to yourself? Lol. There was no discussion of cautious epistemic grounding, holistic thinking, or whatever you'd call the drivel described above when I made my post. I simply said Sinema betrayed the values she ran on, and you superfluously chimed in with your brave and indispensable "ewww stage green" retort. I responded by pointing out that it's more effective to specifically state your counterargument rather than casting people into unsubstantiated categories on some tenuous colors model, and apparently you seemed to think that I overlooked the more substantial conversation taking place where yourself, Leo and everyone else were discussing "the more systemically and holistically sound approach" to understanding politics. I've noticed you very commonly fly off the handle with exaggerated condemnations of people you disagree with. First I'm a "brain-rotted authoritarian" for rejecting homophobia, and now I'm a "mouth-foaming keyboard warrior" for rightfully stating that Sinema betrayed her constituents. Have fun with that.

@Leo Gura Her independent judgement is shit. I'm trying to imagine the contempt for the working class one must carry to actually use their senate vote to flamboyantly thumbs down a $15 minimum wage. Content warning: incredibly cringeworthy crime against humanity seen below @AtheisticNonduality The conflation of blind centrism with "stage yellow/turquoise" has got to be the most pussified sentiment commonly seen on this forum. As if it isn't spineless enough ascribing people's actions to some flimsy colors model instead of precisely articulately your specific grievance with their position. @Danioover9000 You rarely have any modicum of a clue what you're talking about when I read your posts. Hitler never betrayed the values he touted when he rose to power. He was very popular in Germany at the time, and he rose to power through the Nazi party by creating a mass movement around the same values that he enacted when he took power. Communism is an economic system unto itself... No self-contained system, no matter how controversial, can be a traitor to its own values. This is just asinine, you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. If, as an embarrassed response, you want to retroactively insist that your use of "traitor" is more loose-ended, or that you simply meant that the subjects in question harmed humanity, then Sinema obviously fits this definition by siding with republicans. Your view of the world is insultingly simple. Democrats are supposed to have a 51 - 49 lead in senate seats. Except in actuality, they do not, because Sinema will now side with republicans. You think the constituents who helped get this traitor elected are out of bounds for not giving respectful deference to her callous betrayal? Millions of lives will be affected by her actions. Honestly dude, your posts never fail to make me cringe to infinity. As if my spiritual development is hindered by calling a spade a spade.

@Leo Gura People knocked on doors, did canvasing and grassroots fundraising to get her elected. She betrayed the values she ran on, how is this not a traitor? I'm personally willing to call her far worse things than a traitor but lets just stick with that for now.

Yeah, right? I mean you literally said you experienced unspeakable ecstasy, at what point does a conception of "demon" become a good thing if all it does is bestow knowledge and ecstasy on you. This seems accurate based on my experience. This seems to fall within the "transformative use" exception of copyright law, I don't think Leo would even consider this a copyright violation, she's just responding to his content. I was right with you until the women part.

Calling Destiny stage yellow is beyond cringe, the only reason he criticizes the left is because he is spiteful towards progressives (because they have held him to account for dumb shit he's done). Not because he has transcended biases associated with stage green.

The secret's out, conservatism is by and large a party of anti-Semites, as evident from the reaction of this "centrist" audience to Kanye's Blatant Jew hatred. Tim pool also hosts literal nazi Nick Fuentes, and pedophile Milo Yiannopoulos because why not? I challenge you to find a conservative leaning platform which has an audience that would actually condemn anti-Semitism or nazi rhetoric. You will fail this challenge.

time to lock this thread

@Carl-Richard "Heil Hitler!", said the petulant Nazi in a pleasantly warm tone. How were you modded?

You catch on quickly, did you think the imagery being painted was supposed to be flattering? You and @AtheisticNonduality need to get a room. Two butt-buddies, the trusty allies of knuckle-dragging prejudice, bolstering one another so flagrantly you may as well be fellating one another. Some very selective criticism. Perhaps open you eyes to the manic bigotry I'm responding to. But then again, you watch Destiny, so your biases are blatantly apparent.

Such a bitchmade cop-out. AtheisticNonduality: Ohh see, you said a swear word, I knew you were mad!

It's beneath me to continue acknowledging this, but I have already defiled my integrity by affording you my attention to begin with. A more appropriate send-off would be to simply dispense a gaseous emission of bodily discharge directly at your slack-jawed open maw, but unfortunately I don't know the proper spelling to elucidate the sound of flatulence. Simply opposing bigotry (without making an policy based prescriptions that would align with authoritarianism) is enough for you to call me authoritarian. This is juvenile, and doesn't warrant any further discussion. Politics is inherently polarizing, so you, being an epic le reddit atheist debate lord, are sheepishly hiding behind this fact to insist anyone you disagree with is overly emotional. This is pathetically weak, you could say this about anybody discussing politics, and it would never fail to be stupid, especially considering the community you're debating within. People practice zen here. Of course it's possible to hold a position without being emotionally compromised. Such an humbling swing and a miss with that one, but carry on my dude. Your best card will always be the "umad bro?" meme from 2011. Oooof, did you forget that I was simply borrowing "left-wing" directly from your terminology? Yikes, bro. Now this is just getting sad.

You seem to be projecting an emotional temperament when there is none on my end. Seems that any person who rejects hateful sentiments towards marginalized groups is a raging 'SJW ideologue". Now I'm adjacent to a fascist in attitude because I denounce bigotry. You can't actually point to specific things I've said that would lend merit to this tenuous character attack, but instead ascribe this inadequacy to any person who rejects intolerance. The onus is obviously on you to demonstrate why the unflattering terms you haphazardly hurl out towards people are accurate, not for me to falsify it before it is even demonstrated. My dude, this is actually embarrassing. Yes, without having even the slightest frame of reference for where my leftism begins and ends, you are, without any modicum of doubt, more left-wing than I am. Did you forget to delete this from your final draft? The lack of awareness it would take to debase oneself so thoroughly as to post this asinine drivel is mortifying. None of this transcends politics, anything derived from the political stances we are discussing is inherently political. This is quite literally the most pretentious post I've ever seen on the forum. As you and @Oeaohoo have mastered the art of pedantic posturing it is no surprise you two are such butt-buddies. This is what the olden day bigots used to say about interracial marriage. Now that it's obvious you'd be clowned on for owning that position, the people with your tendencies towards right-wing prejudice have to limit their bigotry to the "abnormal" gays in this era. By your definition, it's obvious any minority is abnormal to you. The alternative of "normalizing" LGBT people, is living in a society where the prejudiced hatred manifests in mass shooting hate-crimes such as the Colorado gay night-club incident. This is why acceptance is important, but you're too drunk off Jordan Peterson's ejaculate to see the obvious necessity in normalizing marginalized groups. Cringe.

@AtheisticNonduality Struck a nerve there I see. Sheepishly ascribing "brain-rot" to my opposition towards calling gays degenerates is quite telling. The lack of self-awareness in calling me "overly offended" may deserve an epic trophy of sorts. Apparently it is now "authoritarian" to see gays as human beings. I like how it's only "mild homophobia" to call gays/trans degenerates, and not outright classic bigotry. Judging by your cadence of unwarranted self-assurance, you truly see yourself as a towering intellect, and I'll have to concede that you've put me in my place here. When I next encounter the deranged ramblings of a slack-jawed lobotomy patient I'll have to consider this instance where my preconceptions were brutally refuted by the bigger picture of an alt-right chronic masturbator's idea of intellectual mastery.

@Carl-Richard Interesting take, considering that our friend, the self-appointed intellectual godsend @Oeaohoo seems to know outright that "these things" are bad, but when a progressive steps in, NOW is when you care to be epistemically cautious, applying scrutiny to the values of progressivism while giving a pass to outright bigotry. This is your brain on Destiny.

Wow, after he admitted as much you decoded his cryptic ruse! You've really one-upped us with your unrivaled wits. If you think his outdated stance towards LGBT and his denunciation of the "globalists" constitutes an impressive worldview, just wait 'til you get a load of this Kanye West guy, you're gonna love it.