UnbornTao

Without fear, do you think you'd jump in front of a moving train? Of course not. You haven’t suddenly become oblivious--you’ve simply stopped generating the activity of fear. The emotion isn’t what keeps you from doing dangerous things; it’s the understanding that you’d hurt yourself that does. Fear isn’t actually necessary for taking sensible action. Knowing the potential consequences of a given action is enough to stop you from doing it. Fear is just an unnecessary add-on to that process. Then again, we tend not to be very sensitive to what we do, so the fear might be useful in some cases. Also, you could contemplate: What would it take for me to enjoy the fear?

You!

Taking full ownership of yourself and your life.

Perception is indirect. Is that what the title is referring to? Senses themselves are inventions -- biological ones. Science can't discover what reality is because it is a human invention and its function is investigating and testing objective facts (relative domain). The only way is through direct consciousness. A dogmatic scientist, being unwilling to deconstruct science, won't discover what's true because truth isn't confined to any human activity, the way science is.

Blueberries!

It wouldn't be being emotional but a matter of honesty. If the context and situation are appropriate, you can express your hurt, for example, by what somebody did to you. "I felt hurt when you said such thing about me." You can pretend the hurt, in this case, isn't there like many do. In intimate relationships, I see this communication as essential for its long-term health. Besides, being overly emotional isn't needed. You can admit with confidence a certain feeling was there, depending on the situation. Isn't this being a coward masked as masculinity? We're afraid to admit and communicate certain feelings. I'm not suggesting that we have to be "emotional", just plain honest depending on the context and relationship.

Did he think and grow rich?

Two of my favorites are: The open-mindedness series How to do research (and develop big picture understanding)

I didn't give much thought to my response and glanced over your post without much consideration either. Sorry 'bout that. You could delete the disclaimers about your worry to be coherent and work on clarifying your concern if possible.

First off, you seem to want to manipulate another's behavior. Nothing wrong with that, but look into the motivation behind it. Is it moral? Well, in terms of morality, it is a human invention. An individual's preferences determine, in this case, her diet. Sounds like she doesn't really have the intention to adopt a new diet. No matter how convincing an argument may be, even if he's intellectually on board and loves animals, if the intention isn't there, the behavior will stay the same. Make sure she's honest about her intention, or just arguing for its own sake. All in all, transforming your relationship and therefore disposition towards such matters is the effective route to take, but only if the other actually intents to do it. Superficially adopting a new belief system won't cut it. Emotion plays a bigger role in diet than cold reason and logic. It sounds like she simply wants and enjoys meat, so no matter what she's told, she will keep eating it. That's why there are still many sensitive and compassionate people who love certain animals but still eat meat.

I didn't say that. Contemplation is what I recommended, not psychedelics. Good luck!

@Blackhawk OK, then. Focus on your own contemplation, you don't need to study other's contributions, really. Get who and what you are and then you can tell us.

My point is that, shy of direct consciousness, what others tell you won't make much of a difference. The only way to know for sure is to become directly conscious of the truth. Enlightenment is self-validating, since you are there. It is you.

Haven't you heard his story? He was a guy with no interest nor knowledge in spirituality. In one moment he spontaneously got deeply and permanently enlightened. Don't get stuck in irrelevant details. Worshippers or not, Indian or X, doesn't matter. He seems convincing, haha. You choose what examples to study. In any case, I'm not sure you really want to listen. Maybe you're just trolling. Open up: contemplate who and what you are. That's the direct approach.

@Blackhawk Sure. All beliefs are concepts. You seem to be looking for intellectual conviction. Don't try to climb an imaginary mountain. Unfortunately, no matter what others tell you, self-verification through direct experience is essential here. Don't expect to be "sold" to nonduality through a logical and mental validation process. If it isn't possible, then what is all this fuss about? Seemingly sincere individuals throughout history have pointed out the possibility of grasping your true nature beyond belief and doubt. To be fair, most charlatans do indeed hold nonduality as just a cute or revolutionary idea, but there have been a few who have actually "awakened", see Gotama Buddha. Consider it an invitation for personal exploration, not for believing stuff -- which is antithetical to the real work. Lastly, I'm afraid you might be looking for things to justify a negative cosmology (worldview) that you're holding. Drop that. That could cause unnecessary suffering. A positive relationship to life is far more enlivening, intelligent and healthier. What do you wanna know? Contemplate that deeply until you become directly conscious of its nature. Check out Ramana Maharshi's self-inquiry and, perhaps, study his example.

Dig it. It only appears to be that way. It's a thought, a concept.

It sounds like you superficially adopted an internet guy's communication as a belief and confused that with actual direct consciousness of the matter. You can fall into beliefs as if they are true. This seems to be the case here. You're confusing intellect with direct consciousness, since you wouldn't need to make any mental gymnastics explaining your supposed realization and log in on an internet forum in order to find validation. Enlightenment is always freeing and reveals happiness, not fear and misery. A negative cosmology or worldview is disempowering, ineffective and unnecessary.

@AuroraDream @Wilhelm44 think of it as the possibility evolution of VR headsets. A computer in your brain. Neuralink. Could start by healing neurological disorders at first, like spine related accidents, autism, etc. In the future it would be able to accomplish much more. Of course this technology is highly delicate and would probably be disastrous if, for example, it had a software bug. In Windows, the computer can be restarted. What would you do with your brain in this case if this fucks something up? Update to Windows 11?

We confuse what we are as a conscious entity with our selves. We think that we are a person, the particular one we've crafted throughout our lives. This might not be true. Who are you for real?

Direct experience is self-validating. If it is in fact an authentic insight (not a small if), it reveals what's already true as a conscious experience. Otherwise, it is something else, like a conclusion or opinion.

@Barna the entire point of this work is direct experience. Leo has presumably had many awakenings (direct consciousness of one's nature). So it isn't a belief for him, if he's to be trusted. Besides, I hear tell that consciousness is absolute, hence not limited to the brain. You seem to be very grounded in the mainstream materialist scientific paradigm of reality. Open up. Maybe that's an assumption (and a mistaken one at that). That's why we contemplate.

That's probably your arrogance speaking. Find ways to radically open up. Perhaps uncognized assumptions is the best place for you to look into at this point. Contemplating reality humbles you. It should increase the sense of mystery. If your capacity for wonder is diminishing, then you need to open up even more. Question your beliefs. Are you absolutely certain of what you and life is? Can you say with confidence that there's nothing left about reality for you to become conscious of?

Okay then, thanks.

?