AION

I would look into anima integration so you won’t be chasing your own tail. By your age you should have already gotten some girls. This indicates something. Mind you: to get girls you don’t have to do anything. It is already your birth right. You thinking you need to learn pickup is not necessary. There are tons of people who get gfs without pickup. The only reason you should learn it is for technicalities. If you are going to learn pickup so you think it will make you worthy to get a girl, that will be a huge fuck up. You first have to teach yourself inner worth/respect. If you have inner respect a girl will sense that and want to be with a guy like that. When you become that guy with self esteem, your life will change. You should work on yourself for yourself. A girl should always be second to that. Never chase a bitch and never listen to guys. Their path is different.

If you want a normal social life, go out with friends, have a gf, live like a normal fucking human being, you need money 😂

I would start a business with that money. Money is king.

So true 😂

He uses this word all the time but he doesn’t define what his definition of state is

If it is not life-affirming it is not spirituality. Start broadening your horizon with different teachings because currently you are following a death cult and you are heading towards the end destination full throttle.

Everybody has their masculine and feminine side aka anima/animus. So insulting them would be insulting myself. You kind of missed my point which is ok. Truth can be very emotionally unsettling. @BlessedLiongood points, wisdom in the middle path. But men are forced to live in reality and deal with reality. If you are a hot girl, everybody will tell you everything to keep you happy.

Female spirituality is like cherry picking. It is ad-hock, path of least resistance, emotional, social happening and lala land. Masculine spirituality on the other hand tends to be more like hunting. It is bloody, devastating and one needs to be stoic to make the kill.

SUMMARY OF THE VIDEO: The source presents eight unique and original logical proofs for the existence of God. These proofs were constructed based on hundreds of personal awakenings and contemplations into the nature of God, representing a direct consciousness of God's logical structure, rather than speculation, a belief system, or an ideology. The author emphasizes that this is a grounded empirical exploration of God, similar to how a scientist empirically studies aspects of reality like black holes or the sun. It is asserted that you don't need to believe in God if God is real; you can have consciousness of it and empirically explore it. Empiricism, in this context, is expanded beyond physical objects to include abstract entities, like what mathematicians explore in their work. Important Warnings and Caveats: The proofs and logic presented are retrospective. You cannot use this logic to reach God or conclude that God exists if you haven't already experienced it; this is because whether the logical conclusions correlate empirically to reality is unknown without direct experience. Awakening is the only way to know that God exists. Aside from awakening, all you have are speculations, conclusions, theories, and beliefs. God is not a logical conclusion reached through reasoning alone. Just because the logic of the proofs is valid doesn't mean it will persuade anyone. The mind has an infinite capacity for doubt, independent of truth or validity. These proofs are not expected to convince atheists, materialists, scientists, or skeptics because their existing paradigms and biases will likely cause them to reject the conclusions. Different logical systems exist, and people can use logic to justify different positions. Tautology is presented as a feature, not a bug, when discussing something as fundamental as the basis of existence (God). Reality's existence is a metaphysical tautology – reality must exist. Understanding the logic presented here will likely not lead to an awakening, although it's a possibility. The primary point of discussing this logic is to provide an understanding of God's logical structure, which is important for deepening awakenings and aiding in the integration process after direct experiences of God. Encountering or experiencing God is not enough; comprehension of what God is, why it is how it is, and its logic is necessary. These proofs are presented somewhat "tongue-in-cheek"; they are better described as post-hoc descriptions of the ultimate structure of existence. Core Concepts: God is Reality. God is absolute infinity. This is not the limited infinity of mathematics, but absolute infinity. God is the very basis of existence. God is absolute unity. God is unlimited. God has absolute sovereignty over itself. God has properties like love, omnipotence, omniscience, intelligence, beauty, goodness, and perfection. These are seen as necessary logical consequences of infinity. Love is an ontological condition of unity, not just a human emotion. When everything is ontologically united, that is metaphysical love. The deepest form of love is becoming identical to the beloved, which requires collapsing distinctions into absolute nothingness/formlessness (absolute unity). Anything that exists is a distinction. Distinctions are imagined by a mind. Absolute distinction is impossible as it would limit reality. The collapse of all distinctions leads to pure indistinctness or nothingness, which is absolute unity, absolute infinity, God. God is Mind (capital M), the unlimited ability to imagine all possible distinctions. Mind is fundamentally absolute nothingness that spontaneously precipitates distinctions. Logic is absolute and fundamental, baked into the fabric of existence, not merely a human conceptual activity or axiomatic system. Logic extends beyond human sanity and can seem transhuman. Disregarding logic makes worldviews (like materialism, atheism) incoherent. God is seen as logic itself. The Eight Proofs (Titles): The logic of oneness. The logic of distinction. Argument from numerical infinity. Argument from infinite division. The logic of self-creation. The logic of limits. Argument from control. The impossibility of finite objects. Detailed Exploration of Selected Proofs: 1. The Logic of Oneness: The argument begins with two possibilities: reality is one, or it is not one. The claim is that if reality is one, it must be God. Anything that is one must have absolute sovereignty over itself because there is no "other" to limit it. An object that is one has no other, thus nothing to limit it, making it unlimited. Any imagined limit would have to be part of the oneness, meaning the oneness controls its own limits, thus is unlimited and has absolute sovereignty. This unlimited sovereignty equates to God. The author then addresses the possibility that reality is not one, suggesting it must be divided by something (a boundary, gap, nothingness). This division must be either real or unreal. If the division is unreal, reality has not been divided and remains one. You cannot divide a real thing with an unreal thing. If the division is real, then the division itself is real, and all parts of reality (including the division) are real. Everything that is real is united together by its realness. Any real thing used to divide reality ends up uniting it instead. For example, a real knife used to cut reality must be real, and its realness unites it with the reality it attempts to cut. Even nothingness, if it were real and dividing spacetime, would connect the parts it separates. Therefore, it is absolutely impossible to divide reality; it can only be one. This oneness is reality, and reality is God. Because this oneness (reality) has no other, it is unlimited and has infinite power/omnipotence. This oneness/unity is also linked to love, which is described as the ontological condition of unity. 2. The Logic of Distinction: Anything that exists is a distinction. Even the concept of "not a distinction" is a distinction. All perceived differences (something/nothing, existence/non-existence, limited/unlimited, possible/impossible, real/imaginary, one/many, different starting states of reality, conceptual/physical) are distinctions. These distinctions are held within a mind. It is asserted that there is no such thing as an absolute distinction because that would impose a limit on unlimited reality. Distinctions can come and go. When all distinctions collapse, what remains is pure indistinctness or nothingness. This collapse of distinctions leads to absolute unity, absolute infinity, nothingness, which is God. God is described as the entire possibility space of all distinctions. God, or Mind, is the unlimited ability to imagine all possible distinctions. Physical reality is seen as a "precipitate" of the ontological condition where there is no distinction between absolutely anything. God creates things by imagining distinctions. The distinction between any two things (like a chicken and a kangaroo) is just a conception within consciousness and can be collapsed into absolute unity (nothingness), which is presented as the highest form of love. Every limit to reality is a distinction, imagined by a mind (which is nothingness). The infinite field (God) is unlimited because it imagines all distinctions and therefore has infinite power to materialize anything it can imagine. 6. The Logic of Limits: This proof explores the possibility of reality being limited. There are three initial possibilities: Initially, nothing exists: If nothing exists, no limits exist (as a limit is something), so reality is unlimited, thus God. Initially, something exists which is not a limit: By definition, reality is unlimited. Initially, something exists and it is a limit upon reality: Only in this case is reality potentially limited. If such a limit exists, it is either undoable or not undoable. If the limit is undoable: Reality can simply undo that limit, making it not a real or permanent limit. Therefore, reality is effectively unlimited, thus infinite, thus God. If the limit is not undoable: The only way a limit could be not undoable is if there is some other limit outside the first one preventing it from being undone. This requires a second limit, which needs a third to prevent it from being undone, and so on. This leads to an infinite chain of limits. An infinite chain of limits either terminates (making it finite, with the topmost limit being undoable, thus the whole system is unlimited) or it literally is infinite, in which case you have infinity, which is God. Therefore, reality cannot be permanently locked down; it is impossible to have a limit that cannot be undone. The very logic of existence requires it to be infinite and unlimited. If reality is unlimited, anything goes, anything imaginable is possible, and everything imaginable is possible, including the greatest imaginable thing: God (infinite consciousness, love, perfection, etc.). Absolute perfection must exist simply because it can exist, and every possible thing that can exist must exist. An unlimited object leads to a "runaway chain reaction of imagination" or an "explosion of possibility" that bootstraps itself to higher orders until it reaches infinite imagination/love, which is God. 3. Argument from Numerical Infinity: The argument points to the human mind's ability to count numbers infinitely. The fact that your mind can imagine ever larger numbers means that reality must be actually infinite, not just potentially. This is considered sufficient proof of infinity and God. While skeptics might claim the mind is a finite brain/computer, the source asserts the mind is infinite and is not limited to neurons; it actually can imagine infinitely higher numbers. The inability to explicitly count to infinity is due to finite lifespan, but the capacity to grasp ever higher numbers infinitely is proof of the mind's infinity. This cannot be empirically proven in the traditional sense (like counting all numbers), but it can be implicitly grasped through consciousness and intelligence. The key step connecting this to God is the claim that if any part of reality can be shown to be infinite, all of reality must be infinite. This is illustrated with the example of a 3D cube with two finite dimensions and one infinite dimension; the entire cube becomes infinite. Similarly, an infinite object held within a computer would mean the computer is infinite. Since the number line (an infinite object) is inside your mind, your mind is infinite. Since your mind is inside the universe (and mind and world are not distinct), the universe must also be infinite. Anything that is infinite is God. This infinity is not just mathematical infinity, but encompasses everything imaginable. Mathematical infinity is just one "sub-infinity" or aspect of absolute infinity (God). Anything infinite that is imagined is a part of God. Scientists/mathematicians are seen as "ants" focusing on small aspects of infinity without seeing the whole (the "elephant"). The ability to grasp infinity requires an infinite mind. Even science/physics implicitly relies on infinities (fields, calculus, Big Bang/black hole singularities). 4. Argument from Infinite Division: This proof is based on the fact that you can subdivide any number infinitely; there is no smallest number. This can only be the case if the mind and the universe are actually infinite. This infinite divisibility is evident abstractly in the mind (e.g., the infinite digits of Pi). The source strongly rejects the scientific/materialist idea that reality is made of discrete, indivisible particles or pixels. It claims that reality is infinitely deep and you can subdivide things forever. This is known through direct consciousness/awakening, which reveals the visual field has infinite resolution and is infinitely continuous, not made of pixels. Don't confuse the limits of scientific measurement with the nature of reality itself. Again, if reality was finite, infinite subdivision wouldn't be possible. By the logic that if anything is infinite, all of reality is infinite, the possibility of infinite division proves that all of reality is infinite, and thus God exists. 5. The Logic of Self-Creation: There are two types of things: finite and infinite. A finite thing cannot create itself because it would need to exist before it could create, which is a logical impossibility. All finite things observed come from other finite things, in a causal chain. The argument then explores possibilities: either there is an infinite chain of finite things, or not. If the chain is infinite, it is God, because anything infinite is God. A potential objection is a finite closed loop of creation (e.g., chicken from dinosaur, dinosaur from crocodile, ... fish from chicken) instead of an infinite chain. However, if this loop is finite, it cannot be self-created (as finite things cannot self-create). This finite loop would require something outside it to create it, leading to a larger loop or chain. If you claim the loop existed eternally, that proves God, as anything eternal exists infinitely. If it's part of a larger loop, you face an infinite regress problem that cannot terminate finitely; termination leads to an unlimited system, and non-termination means an infinite chain (God). Therefore, a finite chain cannot terminate and must ultimately be an infinite chain, which is God. Self-creation is possible only for infinity because it has no outer boundary and is one. God as an infinite void is eternal and didn't need creation, or it can be said to have created itself eternally. Furthermore, God as the void spontaneously manifests finite forms (dreams distinctions). This activity of mind generating form from void is creation, and because it's the ultimate reality doing it, it's self-creation. All creation is self-creation; the universe dreams itself into existence out of nothing. Infinity is capable of self-creation because it is not limited by linear causation, time, space, or sanity. Infinity can "bootstrap itself" into existence. This self-creation is considered an absolute logic of reality, the only explanation for how anything can exist. 7. Argument from Control: Either reality has total control over itself, or it does not. Anything with total self-control is God. To deny God, you must claim reality does not have total self-control. If reality does not have total control over itself, something else must control it. This controlling entity cannot be part of reality, because if it were, it would be included in the totality of reality, meaning reality controls itself, which is God. So, the controller must be something outside of reality. However, anything outside of reality is unreal by ontological necessity. The unreal cannot have any influence or control over the real. Therefore, nothing controls reality other than itself; reality has absolute control over itself. An unlimited reality with absolute self-control would choose to be absolute perfection (infinite love, beauty, goodness, intelligence, consciousness). Thus, reality is God. 8. The Impossibility of Finite Objects: The claim is that infinity must exist. It is impossible for any finite thing to exist entirely on its own. Any finite thing (chicken, black hole, number) imagined must exist within some infinite background void, space, or field. You cannot imagine a finite object without also imagining something else (a backdrop, container) within which it is situated. If this background is finite, it requires another background beyond its edge, leading to an infinite regress or chain, which requires infinity. Therefore, reality cannot have an ultimate boundary. This infinite background, within which all finite objects are situated, is God. Science and physics implicitly recognize this by requiring the use of infinite fields (gravitational, electromagnetic), as finite fields would be incoherent. Physics and mathematics, in this view, are implicitly pointing to God. Further Points on Infinity, Logic, and Self-Evidence: God is infinity, but infinity is not a number or math; math is just a small part of it. Understanding infinity is key to understanding existence. Infinity has counterintuitive, radical, "magical" properties that finite objects do not. The realization of God involves experiencing this magic, which can initially be met with disbelief and self-doubt because it seems too good to be true. Overcoming this self-gaslighting and societal conditioning (science, religion, etc.) is part of the process of realizing God. God is so fundamental that it sits below the level of explanation; words and finite concepts will inevitably distort it. This distortion is not a flaw in the nature of God or the insights, but a limitation of the finite means of communication. Intelligence is required to separate the signal from the noise in the communication. God is absolute self-evidence, more self-evident than any human thought, fact, idea, mathematical proof, or logical argument. God is the basis for all existence and is existence itself. The logic presented here is a "meta-logic" or "trans-logical". It is absolute and fundamental, not merely a human construction. Contemplating logic's absolute nature is crucial. God itself is bound by this logic, or is logic itself. Ignoring this absolute logic leads to an incoherent worldview. Materialism and atheism are seen as logically incoherent because they cannot account for the existence of finite things without an appeal to infinity. They rely on a shallower form of logic to justify their positions. The atheist who admits infinity is needed but denies it is God does not understand the full consequences of infinity. The source claims that an honest, serious materialist/atheist, upon contemplating these points, would discover the incoherence of their worldview and transition to idealism, recognizing that the only thing that can exist is an infinite mind. These proofs are not intended to validate any specific religion, new age fantasy, conspiracy theory, or paranormal belief. Understanding the logic of God requires significant effort and contemplation, often derived through one's own awakenings. The shared logic is a map for others to retrace and discover insights for themselves. Metaphysics and ontology are considered the most real thing there is and are necessary for making sense of the world. Doing proper metaphysics means following the "infinite way". The author expresses astonishment that these seemingly obvious insights are not widely known or taught by experts in various fields (philosophers, scientists, theologians, gurus). This lack of understanding is attributed to human selfishness, self-deception, ideology, beliefs, and groupthink preventing people from engaging in fundamental existential thinking. This work stems from 20 years of first principles existential thinking focused on epistemology (how can I know anything?) and ontology (what is anything, how can anything exist?). It involves discarding all external authority and taking on total epistemic responsibility. This type of "real work" is rare and leads to a fundamentally different understanding than conventional fields. It is described as "jailbreaking" the mind and opening it to God in extraordinary ways.

You need to look into your jealousy and contemplate on it and emotionally process it. Because your anger and jealousy shows off as your vibe. Sometimes I sense a woman being angry at me for not giving her attention and it doesn’t want to make me talk to her. Like wtf did I do? The counter intuitive move is to be happy for your friends and their relationships instead of being jealous. It will brighten your heart and you will be more comfortable in your skin plus you will be more likely to attract somebody. Don’t underestimate what I just told you. This is done from the heart, not from the mind. If you fix your heart, you will attract somebody.

5 MeO is a hell hole for me too.

Everything we consume has a soul. When we use it we integrate with it. That is the whole point of medicine. One needs to respect it and honor it. Especially things that are given by nature. Cannabis is something wonderful. Respecting Mother Nature. If you don’t respect it, it won’t respect you. Respecting another is respecting yourself.

@Yimpa don’t post that here

Two things I would like to comment on not all weed is created equal weed is a medicine, it shouldn’t be used recreationally but medically Weed helped me a lot to get loose and just chill. But when overused one get’s all the bad effects everybody is talking about. I do use it from time to time and it is amazing for depression and emotional regulation. It just gets fucked when you depend on it. I had this friend who told me to never take MDMA and when I questioned him he told me he was taking 3 tablets every week. Dude I never took 3 tablets. Only half is enough for me. The whole thing is to have responsibility and know when to take and stop taking it.

His books are just something else. I think not knowing goes very deep and he needs to go deeper. Totally jail breaking the mind is very difficult and smarter people have a harder time because the firewall is much stronger.

He is still smarter than anybody on this forum. But that is his Achilles heel too. And what I find funny is that he numbers his chapters like the Bible. Like chapter 2, paragraph 3, sentence 5. And then he references stuff from his book like he is some prophet. In a certain sense he is. His teachings are the best in terms of intellectualism. The thing is to get to total understanding of reality one must first be able to navigate out of his own head. I’m such a guy. That is why Ralston is perfect for me.

I'm reading book of not knowing by Ralston and that book is hitting so hard. Life is such a big mystery. People don't even understand women and they think they can understand the fabric of reality lol.

Some updates: Gemini's 2.5 deep research is just amazing. It is free and creates amazing rapports. Elevenreader is amazing app for your phone or PC. It uses AI natural speech to read epub or pdf to you. It is crazy that it is free. I would pay a lot of money for these tools.

I see a lot of loose threads. It is better if we create a mega thread so all the recommendations are at one place 🔊 Best for Voice Conversations & Realistic AI Chatting ChatGPT-4o – Best for natural conversations, understands tone/emotion. Claude 3 (Anthropic) – Great for philosophical and deep discussions. Google Gemini – Strong at voice-based answers, integrates with Google services. Meta AI (Llama 3) – Decent free alternative, works well in social apps. Microsoft Copilot (with GPT-4 Turbo) – Solid for productivity and voice queries. 📖 Best for Long-Form Writing & Storytelling Claude 3 Opus – Best for writing detailed, coherent stories. ChatGPT-4o – Great balance of creativity and structured writing. Sudowrite – Specifically designed for fiction writing. NovelAI – Focused on AI-generated stories with customizable styles. Jasper AI – Good for marketing copy and creative writing. 💼 Best for Productivity & Work Assistance Microsoft Copilot – Integrated with Office 365, great for work tasks. ChatGPT-4o – Can handle coding, summaries, and workflow automation. Notion AI – Best for organizing notes, to-do lists, and research. Google Gemini – Works seamlessly with Google Docs & Sheets. Zoom AI Companion – Best for summarizing meetings. 🧠 Best for Deep Thinking & Complex Problem Solving Claude 3 Opus – Handles abstract and complex ideas the best. ChatGPT-4o – Strong logical reasoning and structured thinking. Wolfram Alpha (with AI plugin) – Best for math & data-based reasoning. Perplexity AI – Best for research and sourcing real-time information. Pi (Inflection AI) – Gentle and insightful for deep personal reflections. 🎨 Best for AI Art & Image Generation MidJourney – Best for artistic and highly detailed images. DALL·E 3 (OpenAI) – Best for realistic and controlled image generation. Stable Diffusion XL – Open-source and highly customizable. Adobe Firefly – Best for design and professional use. Runway AI – Good for AI video editing as well. 💰 Best Free AI Chatbots ChatGPT (free version) – Still very capable, but limited. Google Gemini – Free and good at general knowledge. Meta AI (Llama 3) – Free on Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. Perplexity AI – Free for research and web-based answers. Pi AI – Free and great for personal chats. What do you guys think? Are there any new AI tools you’d recommend? 🚀

Is this true? I hear a friend say this to me and I heard some masculinity coaches saying this. From my observations it is true. Especially in a regular relationship where the woman is seeking to start a family and needs a guy to provide and protect. Most women are hypergamous. So they want a guy to be better or higher up the social and economic chain. It is pure coincidence but I was talking to a salsa dancing friend and he said the same thing: if you want to make a chance with a girl you have to be the better dancer but that is out of the scope of this thread. It makes me think. Does love really exist? Modern relationships are based on value exchange. You basically have to have what the other person wants which is basically value exchange aka win win relationships. Unconditional love is not a real thing; only lack of options which people falsely characterize as love.

The closest that comes that explain the mechanics of consciousness is quantum mechanics. Books like reality trans surfing are very fruitful books and although it doesn’t explain the true nature of consciousness, it is very practical and it works. Theories are at the end of the day just maps. And even the best map is just a map. And Leo’s theories are just maps too. Not ultimate truth because ultimate truth can be put in words. Because we can’t capture infinite truth in the finite words. How I see fabric of consciousness is in Carl Jung’s way. All there is just consciousness and unconsciousness. What is within the light of your consciousness is consciousness and everything outside of that is your unconsciousness. With psychedelics and shit your consciousness can become so bright that it extends much further than what you can see right now. Your life is just a flame in the dark like Prometheus. That is the best metaphor you can use for existence.

I do believe in God and I live in a deep SD orange country so if you say you believe in God people will think you are backward. And to be honest although I believe in God I have more in common with atheists than the regular Christian or Muslim. Christians and Muslims tend to be very rigid and not open minded than Atheists. At least with atheists you can have very interesting conversations, especially with the ones who are in the twilight zone between SD orange-green. The thing is I don't like to over explain things, so with some instances I just say I'm atheists because I know with these people it is very binary: you are rational and with us or you are irrational and with those religious zealots. So do you guys always say you believe in God? I believe 100% authenticity is stupid. Especially when you deal with regular people. One has to develop healthy persona's to deal with people. Sometimes being authentic is not loving. Mask on. Mask off.

This is how I see it State = condition of your body/mind (which are the same anyway) Frame = how you position your body/mind Body is feminine and mind is masculine and together they form a union aka sacred marriage. That is why it is important to take both of your body and mind. If you don’t take care of your body you will have a bad marriage and vis-à-vis. And the bad news. You can’t divorce your wife.