Monster Energy

It’s very logical, you just haven’t thought it through carefully enough, and your comparisons have too many flaws. Watch the video and reconsider your perspective.

It’s not that water is bad. The reason dry fasting is considered deeper is because, without water, nothing interferes with the body’s healing process. The body can focus completely on healing itself on a deeper level. The reason dry fasting is seen as more powerful than water fasting for sickness is because sickness can survive with water, but without water, the body enters a state where it can heal more deeply.

Life can be tough. You do what you want, I just wanted to tell you this in case it could give you some hope.

Someone had to be stupid in this life, and apparently it was you. But I hope that in your next life you’ll be a little more open-minded about things. The funny thing is, you have no problem believing that you are God or that you created your own mother, but the moment someone says that dry fasting can heal everything, you suddenly act completely shocked. Fascinating, really, the universe can handle a god complex, but apparently a dry fast is where you draw the line. Wow. Please disappear from my thread. I don’t want this level of low IQ here. Thanks for stopping by, it was almost entertaining.

I respect that you have experience with fasting, but water fasting and dry fasting are not the same thing. A lot of people judge dry fasting based only on their experience with water fasting, but they are different practices with different effects on the body. Fasting is not about believing that you will become physically immortal. The deeper purpose is to allow the body to return to a state of balance and to awaken a deeper connection with yourself. The body has an incredible intelligence that we underestimate. Just because something did not work for one person does not mean it cannot transform another person’s experience. Many things in life depend on the individual’s state, discipline, environment, and level of commitment. Of course, everyone eventually leaves the physical body. The point is not to escape death; the point is to experience the highest level of health, clarity, and awareness while we are here.

I’ve been reflecting deeply on the idea that our true nature is already whole and complete. I think I understand it intellectually, but I’m trying to understand what it actually means in direct experience. Here’s an example. Sometimes I have a strong sexual fantasy, and my mind says: “You need to masturbate to this fantasy, otherwise you’ll experience a deep sense of loss.” The fear feels incredibly convincing, almost as if something essential is at stake. What I’m trying to understand is this. I’m not trying to get rid of desire. I don’t want to stop feeling lust. What I want is to stop feeling psychologically dependent on fulfilling it. Ideally, I’d like to reach a place where: If I choose to masturbate, that’s okay. If I choose not to masturbate, that’s equally okay. Not because both choices produce the exact same experience, but because neither choice determines whether I’m fundamentally whole. If our true nature is already complete, is the reason fear gradually loses its power that we discover through direct experience that no external experience can actually make us more complete or less complete? Is psychological suffering created by the belief that “I need this particular experience in order to be okay”? If that’s true, why does that realization eventually make desire lose its sense of urgency? Why does something that once felt like life or death eventually become just another passing impulse? I’d love to hear how others understand this, especially those who have had direct nondual insights or awakening experiences.

The intelligence behind that illusion is incredible.

Thanks for explaining it so clearly.

That makes sense. But why does that shift make attachment disappear? Why does the mind stop believing it needs a particular experience to be complete?

I appreciate that. I’m not trying to force anything. I’m just curious about one thing. Before that realization, what made experiences feel so necessary? And after it, what made that feeling disappear?

That last part is exactly what I’m trying to understand. What actually changes so that “whether you do it or not, all is perfectly fine” becomes your lived experience instead of just an idea?

Not even women understand each other.

Glad to hear that

Say that to feminism

I’m not talking about becoming some emotionless person who doesn’t care about anything. I’m more curious about why the mind can take something enjoyable and turn it into something we feel we need. Like why does it go from “this is amazing” to “I can’t be okay without this”?

I understand what you mean about gain and loss being relative, and that happiness cannot truly come from external things. But how does this apply to desire? If someone feels like they need a certain experience to feel complete, where does that sense of lack actually come from? And what changes when someone can still enjoy an experience, but no longer feels like they need it to be okay?

Could you elaborate on that? From your perspective, what actually changes so that the urge no longer feels psychologically necessary? Is it simply seeing that there was never a separate self lacking anything, or is there something more to it through direct experience?

That’s actually what I’m curious about. I’m not asking whether the urge gets stronger with abstinence. I’m asking why, for some people, it eventually stops feeling psychologically necessary.

I agree that scarcity mindset plays a role. But I think my question is a bit deeper than that. I’m not asking how to become less desperate because I believe I can get the experience again. I’m asking how someone realizes they don’t need the experience in order to be whole in the first place. In other words, what changes so that the experience is enjoyed if it happens, but no longer feels psychologically necessary?

I can definitely see what you mean about the “lone wolf” aspect. I also agree that you don’t necessarily have to be deeply immersed in society to make meaningful observations about it. I’m curious though, beyond his personality, what do you think are some of his strongest ideas or insights? Has anything he’s said genuinely changed the way you see society or existence?

How can it be so hard to understand that you are the dreamer and in the dream at the same time? No wonder so many people get banned, it’s kindergarten-level stuff.

Bold choice.

I hope one day I see you sitting in a chair, ready to run.

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I think we might be talking about two different things. I’m not asking about suppressing desire or developing self-control. I’m also not asking about an abundance mindset or believing I can create more experiences in the future. What I’m trying to understand is something more fundamental. If our true nature is already whole and complete, why does that realization eventually make desire lose its sense of urgency? For example, if my mind says, “You need this experience or you’ll feel a deep sense of loss,” why does that thought eventually stop feeling true? What is the actual mechanism? Is it because I directly realize that no experience can make me more complete or less complete? Or is it something else?

Who doesn’t have attachment issues these days