Scholar

But notice that this was true also for the cardinals who ordered to slaughter the heretics. They were incredbily smart human beings who wanted the best for people and the world in general. Sadly they were very rigid in their ways, which prevented them from opening their minds to new possibilities.

This attitude would work if the world was absent of group dynamics and historical discrimination. The way you might want to start looking at it: In the past we have had discrimination based on skin color, which lead to the current status quo. If all group dynamics are now ignored, and discrimination of the past forgotten, we will not be able to create systemic changes so as to help the status quo to change. Rather the individualistic point of view can be used to dismiss group dynamics and uphold the status quo. For example, if we have a higher suicide rate amongst a certain population group, it would be far more effective to analyze the problems with group dynamics instead of encountering each individual as a completely new set of problems. We might put certain protections on that group so as to equalize it among all other groups. This will allow us for faster and systemic change instead of individualistic approaches which do not account for the differences in groups. For example, we might want to elevate a certain group specifically in a way that will seem disciminatory towards other, more established groups. However the elevation would only be done temporarily, until the groups are equalized. This is not done to inherently help the groups, but to help the most amount of people and create an equal society in the most effective way. Of course we have to look out for new power dynamics that would arise from the elevation of these certain groups. Power corrupts and any change of status quo can and will be attempted to be used for individualistic and collective gains. One might for example use a protective status for their own egoic needs, which is something we expect and observe. But the truth is that protective status is already present in groups that hold more power and already individuals in these groups use these special protections to actualized their egoic desires. As these special protections are pulled back from these groups and the protections of others are elevated, we are going to see what you would describe as unfair. That "unfairness" is a necessary byproduct for the overall greater good. In the end we are seeking to break down the group identities and create new identities which are free of egoic power structures. For example, women might experience a shift towards masculinity to equalize their status in society. As their status is going to be equalized, they will in the end be able to be free to follow their own energy again, namely the feminine energy. This is basically the deconstruction of societal norms and power structures by constructing new societal norms and power structures. An even simpler example to illustrate is the following: There is a limited amount of food and two people. One person is stronger and takes most of the food, as a result growing even bigger and stronger. The second person is growing weaker and smaller. Now comes along the notion of equality. It's not fair that the stronger person gets more food, instead everyone should get the same amount of food. This is better, but the problem is that the stronger person will remain stronger and bigger, because he will keep growing as much as the weaker and smaller person. It would only lead to the status remaining still. What would actually be fair, one might argue, is taking away some food from the stronger person and giving it to the weaker. While the weaker person will grow stronger, the stronger person will grow weaker and smaller. This will be obviously be seen as unfair, but do you really think it is? How is it fair for the weaker person to remain weak just because the stronger person had an unfair advantage at the beginninger? Would it not be better to give the weaker person more food and the stronger less until they were equally strong? At that point we can give everyone the same share. You are basically here arguing that we should just give everyone an equal amount and wait for everything to equalize naturally. However, this attitude will lead to a great amount of suffering, and it is inherently a limitation of stage orange values, which you are residing in.

It's so funny how his entire personality is structured after the rationalist ideal that he is clinging to. Arrogance concealed as humility, dogma played up as reason. The way he speaks, the words he chooses, even the tone of his voice are all part of the act. Even his pose during the interview. The reason itself is not actually the problem with rationalists, it is the attachment to trying to come off as reasonable at all costs, even at the cost of truth. I can't believe how cliche this guy is, it's like they got him right out of the rationalists factory. This is the kind of person who would have been preaching catholicism during the "enlightenment" revolution, scoffing at the ignorance of the anti-churchlings. Exact same tone of voice, exact same pose, just that the story is a different one.

That's not necessarily true, because the dynamic in a cult can allow for the leader to tell people to question and research on their own in a very particular way, leading to people either not researching and questioning at all (after all, the leader tells us to question everything, that means he must be honest!) or to research and question in a way which will not actually help them at all. Flat Earthers are very much into the "Look into it, just question it man. Don't just believe what science tells you!" and I personally know of people who use fake-science and teaches it to students who pay for it while the students have no capacity to actually verify it themselves, as it would require in-depth education in whatever scientific field. A cult leader might use an appearence of open-mindedness and encouragement of independence to actually gain the trust of his followers. He can abuse the fact that most people are to lazy or maybe not even able to question it themselves or to do in-depth research. Rather he can hope, and often successfully, that people will trust him even more so because he is telling them to question him. Not saying this is the case with Leo, but I have definitely personally observed this. Not in full-cults, as I have no direct experience with them, but in borderline cults/money-grabbing circles.

I am not quite sure what you mean. Perception to me is Being, I would say all Sentience is Being, but not all Being is Sentience.

I am not a mind-body dualist so to me the concept of perception is delusional. There is simply a certain state of being, it is not "caused" by a brain. It seems like a certain state of being, namely sentience, is correlated to what we interpret to be a very specific form of interactions between wavefunctions. It is so particular that it can exist in the same form, namely the brain, with almost the exact same type of interaction between wave-functions, and still be present or not be present. This is the case in deep sleep, when what we call sentience is not present at all. The form of being that is present at that point is not sentience, it does not contain suffering or what our standard definition of "experience" is. Again, that state is so particular and specific that even brain-activity is not equal to it, as the brain is very active during deep sleep. The assumption is that this particular state of being, which we call sentience, is very particular to survival mechanisms, namely ones that require the complex nagivation of reality by immediate means. The organism of the human, even in the state of deep sleep, is far beyond the complexities any plant can provide. Of course plants are Being, thus they are consciousness, yet I do not think it is likely that they are what we consider to be sentience. They for example do not require ego, they do not require to suffer, they do not interact with other beings in the same way we do. They cannot run away from prey, they do not require a fear of death. All they require is deep sleep. A plant, in other words, does not require the illusion of duality, thus there is no difference between destroying a rock and destroying a plant. The intelligence contained in a rock is beyond comprehension, the difference from rock to plant is so slim it would make no difference, so is the difference between rock and human. I do not think intelligence implies sentience, rather sentience is a very particular kind of intellgence. In this way intelligence cannot be seperated from being/consciousness, but it can be seperated from sentience. Of course there is something going on in plants that the vast majority of humans are not currently aware of, but the same is true for a rock and the air your breath. Sure, plants might have a particular form of intellgence, they might resonate to different states of being, like particular aspects of human sentience. There could be plant sentience, but there could also be rock sentience, ocean sentience and so forth. I find that most people have a tendency to correlate a certain way of structured movement, which they call intelligence, to what they are in their waking state. But what about what there is in deep sleep? What would it mean to end a life that was in deep sleep for all of eternity? A life that could not remember anything, a life that was so immersed in being it simply was pure being. What would be the difference between ending that life and not ending it? I would argue in a similar way as far as AI goes, however I do not really believe that AI is possible in the way we think it is. Computers are Being no matter what, but when they become Sentience is to me a question of when there is a certain interaction of wavefunctions, a very particular kind, so particular we cannot even tell the difference between the waking state and the deep-sleep state. How I look at it: If the each neuron in the brain was a lamp, the light the lamp produces is not sentience, rather the interaction between all the light all the lamps produce is what causes sentience. A very specific kind of interaction is needed for a very specific kind of state of being. Infact, sentience is not "caused" by the interaction of the light, rather the interaction of the light is sentience. It is that particular kind of being, looked at by itself "interpreted" as one of those very interactions. You can also flip it all and say sentience causes the interactions, it doesn't really matter. Computers lack the lamps and they alsp lack the light. Computers are more like a system of strings that just pull on each other. Very rigid, no access to genuine Nothingness or Creativity. The Neurons, the Lamps and the Lights, are in a way directly linked to the "First Cause", Nothingness, Creativity. They are connected to the spark, not because of how they move or what kind of interactions they produce, but because of what they are. Basically, I think computers will only become sentient and therefore genuinely creative once we change the physical structure of the computers, maybe some sort of biological computers or quantum computers. Whatever the "brain" is "accessing" is not at all currently present in computers. This all is kind of obsolete to explain because in the end it is only an explanation in a materialistic framework. Certain kind of wave-formations (imagine perception-waves/being-waves) ARE Sentience. Neurons do not create or cause these wave-formations, rather they "tune" into them. In the end they are not truly seperate and the Neurons themselves are the waves aswell. While computers are also these waves, they do not tune into the same kind of wave-formations, much like a rock isn't. But even that explanation just misses the point, trying to explain this is like using a limited amount of rope to bind two poles together. Once you bind the rope to one pole, you cannot reach the other pole. Or, once you reach the other pole, the previous knot slips. I never said Plants aren't intellgience or not alive. I don't create dualities like life vs non-life or intelligence vs non-intelligence. A rock contains and is just as much alive and intelligent as a plant is, which is why I don't think sentience is correlated to intelligence or life. Sentience is a particular kind of being that is not present in plants, because a plant is not playing the same game we are. The plants "survival" game is so radically different, whatever state of being the plant is is foreign to our notions of suffering, ego, resistence and so forth. And also, being vegan is the best thing you can do for plants. If you say that plants are sentient, you would also have to say that each of your limbs might be sentient. Your hand grows all on it's own, in fact it will grow in all sorts of ways depending on what food you provide it and where it will find resistance. Is your hand it's own sentient being? If not, why not? Why does one body have to contain one sentience? Why do you think that different parts of your brain do not have their own sentience? How do you know each cell does not have it's own sentience?

@Anderz ???

Because plants do not need to suffer or even to be sentient. Plants can pure consciousness, as you are in deep sleep, the same as a rock is. There is no reason for a plant to create it's own world so that it can navigate reality. The plant can simply be a plant, it cannot run away from a predator, it does not run around, create complex social bonds in which it requires awareness of the potential threats that can exist within it, etc. If plants have perceptions, then calculators probably do too. So would the computer you are using right now. Aside from that, being vegan is the best thing you can do for the plants. The animals we eat have the strange tendency to eat plants themselves.

Why does this forum have no Art section? Art is such a relevant topic for consciousness work, possibly even one of the most relevant topics, yet I rarely see anyone in here discuss it. Why do we not have a section where we can share high consciousness art, artistic techniques, advice for creativity etc.? There could even be opportunities for collaborations and the like. Not just "Share your Art", but looking at the entire culture of art as it's own aspect worthy of consideration in our self-actualization process? Maybe I am biased as an artist but I do feel like Art, in some shape or form, would deserve it's own category. Right now I don't feel like there is any place in here I feel comfortable talking and sharing things about Art without it feeling rather off-topic.

Do you really think UBI could be dismantled? I feel like it would be so difficult to just take away 1000$ from all US citizen especially when they get used to it. Infact, I feel like even if it was harmful overall there might be a risk of not being able to pull it back because of how much backlash it would cause from the population. People would structure their life around the increase in income, so simply "dismantling" it would disrupt literally the life of pretty much all americans for whom it would make a signficant difference. I don't know much about US politics but I wouldn't dare to pull that away as a politician, or even dare to attempt do so, fearing the overwhelming negative response from the general population. This is in my opinion why UBI is both so promising and so dangerous, because it will be so difficult to pull it back once people have gotten their share of it.

Why wouldn't it?

Don't you think Bernie will only further the divide currently present in the US? Yang is specifically so appealing because he is so outside the box that he could actually manage to reunite the division currently taking place atleast to some extent. Just because Bernie's ideas are more progressive does not mean that the country will actually progress in case of his presidency. Infact, I would be concerned that the very radical nature of his proposals (atleast in the perspective of the US) will lead to an eventual regression due to backlash or simple failure of implementation. Also, Yang is not a single issue candidate. https://www.yang2020.com/policies/ In my view the most important policy he is proposing are the democracy dollars, it might do wonders to fight against the corruption taking place in US politics. I think the Human Centered Capitalism idea he is specifically proposing, with systemic solutions like incentive structure changes, is a much more appealling transition into eventual socialistic societies than what the current paradigm is limited to. Just ask yourself what will happen if Bernie fails his presidency, what that will mean for the progress of the US and conversely mankind.

Reality and life are not meaningless at all, in the same way reality and life is not redless or triangularless. Meaning is a very specific aspect of Isness, reality/life are full of it. No thing in reality carries another thing within. Sex for example does not contain meaning intrinsically. And obviously meaning does not contain sex. It would be absurd to say something like "Is meaning sexful?", but that is precisely what you are doing, and interestingly also what Leo is doing. He can only say "Life is meaningless", because he is trapped in that game. If he recognized meaning as itself, he would see it exists and is real and is part of Isness as anything else is. Experience is not meaningless, rather meaning is a very particular experience. This whole game you are playing, which you are not conscious of, leads you to the nihilism you are experiencing. You are not observing meaning, but rather you are observing the relationship between meaning and other aspects of experience which you have created. Now that you see that relationship is arbitrary, you might lose the experience of meaning. You can however experience meaning on it's own, as it is it's own experience, it's own dimension of Isness. You do not require anything to be meaningful for you to dwell and enjoy Meaning. Rather than looking at experiences and looking at them as if they are meaningful or meangingless, look at experiences and realize whether the experience of meaning accompanies them or not. Meaning is more like a friend that comes along with other experiences, and you have confused that friend to be part of the other experiences. It's a shock to you that Meaning is not part of the other experiences, leading you to currently reject Meaning. Poor little Meaning is utterly confused at how easily you discriminate against it, simply because you did not see how it was walking with, instead of being part of, other experiences. You should welcome Meaning back, you have to accept it on it's own. This is like your girlfriend changing her clothes and you freaking out because you thought the clothes were part of her.

lol, there is no good explanation other than magic. What Leo calls perception includes everything you consider non-perception, that is the entire point. It does not exclude anything. Perception is another word for Isness, and because most of Isness we already call Perception, the mind has chosen to simply frame it within that already present story.

You will know why when you are getting raped, tortured and killed with no understanding of self-realization at all. There is nothing wrong with stopping to breath, go ahead and see what happens if you do.

Reality is absurd, it is impossible. Everything that seems common, logical, obvious and mundane is magical. It is in Essence impossible and the Veil of Possibility is precisely what allows that Realness to uphold itself. To the degree that magic is seen, to the degree the common becomes the precious, the logical becomes the paradoxical, the obvious becomes the mysterious and the mundane becomes sacred is the degree to which this Realness will dissolve. The Realness of Isness is founded upon the thin Veil which obscures it's impossibility and magic. Unveiling the Veil of Reality is equivalent to unveiling reality itself. When the magic trick, so to speak, is truly seen for what it is, it cannot sustain itself. It is sustained by the very fact that it is not recognized as a magic trick. The greatest magic trick is to hide the Impossible in the Veil of Possibility. It is, for example, to take utter and pure Magic and call it e=mc², as if e=mc² in any way reduced the impossibility and presence of that magic. The mind, by giving it name, can justify it's presence. This is what Illusion is. The Veil of Isness, the Veil which makes the precious common, which makes the paradoxical logical, which makes the mysterious obvious, which makes the sacred mundane. That Veil is what allows it to Be. Abandoning the Veil is abandoning Reality. Remember what Reality was before you were born. There was no logic, there was no physical, there was no name. Growing older, that which Is became less and less mysterious to you. It became less and less like a Fairy Tale. More and more everything was explained and understood. This is not by accident, this is one way in which Reality is manfesting itself. It is by essence manifesting itself through the Faith in it's Possibility. A Faith not merely on an intellectual or emotional level, but on the level of Being. A Faith prior to language and identity. Consciousness is Realness, Consciousness is magic Through sentience there is Physicality, Worldness, Self and Other. It is pure magic disguising itself as Self-evidency. Mind is the Veil of Isness, abandon the Veil of Possibility and No-Mind will follow. Adandon the Veil of Isness by seeing the preciousness in the common, paradox in logic, mystery in the obvious and sacredness in the mundane. To see Magic in all Fascets of Reality. To see the Impossibility in Redness.

A window on which water flows. Water of all colors, including translucent water. Each of the infinite possible colors act and effect their surrounding colors in different ways. Some expand their own color, some dissolve other color, some mix and some create new colors. And some colors interacting create translucent water. The translucent water is Awakening. All other colors are everything else. You, the world, meditation, yoga, psychedelics. All are merely different colors on the Divine Window. The absence of color, the translucency of water, reveals the window beneath, the colorless color beneath. The color which has no form and no name, the color which has no color. Meditation is one color, psychedelics are one color, yoga is one color, death is one color. All that is is water colored in a different way, yet some water creates translucency, some water reveal translucency, it reveals the window beneath, that which is beneath the window. In essence it takes the absence of color for that which is beneath water to be revealed. Yet the window is beneath all colors, that which is beneath the window is beneath all window and all color. In the end, the water, the window and that beneath window is all revealed to be one. Within the window there is all color, within that which is beneath window is all color, within color there is window and that which is beneath window. The transclucency of water will reveal that the window is water, that which is beneath window is water. It reveals that within translucency there are all colors and that within all colors there is translucency. When you eat mushroom, mushroom is color and color changes other color, it might even change color into translucency. All that is is colored water. There is no fundamental difference between the Isness of death, mushroom, meditation. The Isness dances and plays around with itself, it vibrates and swims. When Isness plays, sometimes it becomes so thin that the Glowing Void within is revealed. Reality is obviously not physical, because it is magical. Physical it is only to the degree magic allows it to be.

Cognitive Functioning of Long-term Heavy Cannabis Users Seeking Treatment https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/194703 Cannabis Use and Cerebrovascular Disease https://journals.lww.com/theneurologist/Abstract/2004/01000/Cannabis_Use_and_Cerebrovascular_Disease.5.aspx Brain Morphological Changes and Early Marijuana Use https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J069v19n01_01#.Ugll81MmzUV Cannabis use and progressive cortical thickness loss in areas rich in CB1 receptors during the first five years of schizophrenia https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0924977X10001860 There is a huge bias around Cannabis use and it's harmlessness, despite evidence showing quite the opposite especially in heavy and younger users. You should basically stay away from it until you reach 25 years/your brain is fully developed and even after that do not use it on a too regular basis.

Get a healthy diet, regular excercise and avoid overconsumption of porn is generally something that can always be recommended. And obviously stop multitasking.

I found that watching criminal interrogations to be a great way of studying ego dynamics, especially because it is a high stake environment in which the ego is basically pushed to it's limits. Jim Can't Swim is a great ressource for that with some valuable psychological nuggets. The interrogators use the ego's mechanisms to manipulate it into acting against it's own interest.

Within all there is true Love. Imagine it as a flame which exists in the soul of all beings. Within some it is greater than others, one flame burns stronger than the other. For the seeker, all there must be done is to find that flame no matter how weakly it burns. It is present, it does not need to be created, it really does not even need to be found. It only needs to be seen, it needs to be filled with presence. Presence will make it grow all on it's own. For the one whose flame is already bright, all there must be done is giving that flame presence whilst giving presence to all other aspects of experience. This was the work of Christ, he was masterful at giving presence to love whilst giving presence to the poor, the weak, the undesirable. When the presence is connecting love to other, it's flame will be kindled with the strength of your own flame. The mastery of this work is found in the ability to give presence to love and undesirability at the same time. The diseased, the ugly, the hateful, the dangerous. God has perfect mastery over this, he already is giving presence to all aspects of realness. He is already completely loving towards the hateful, the egoic, the undesirable. The son of God is the son who reflects this mastery, but all being is inherently reflecting this mastery. The flame of the son of God burns so brightly it will kindle the fire of thousands or millions of beings, like a wave of fire burning through the fabric of time and space. A wave so strong it would leave marks in the fabric of reality itself, a wave so strong entire civilizations would be build upon it. God's flame is so strong that all of existence is build upon it. Existence is the infinite flame, the endless fire.

Some of the things that I have done in the past few years that helped me: realizing that everyone is impermanent and will die, what people think of you is therefore irrelevant Slowly challenging yourself to be more and more confronting Somehow realizing that you care about your own life more than about the opinions others have Ego deconstruction work in general, meaning meditation, contemplation, expanding your consumption of stage orange content This will be a long term project, expect it to take a months and even a few years unless you would be focusing a lot on this particular issue. I have been working on this on the side as it is not really a priority of mine. One thing that will help is having something that you care about a lot and that you would put infront of the opinion of others. For me veganism was great for this because it kind of forces you to argue it. When you think about the animals and what they go through, and sitting around people who eat meat who then dare to criticize you for being vegan, that will give you a lot of opportunity to confront them while having the suffering of the animals in the back of your mind. Standing up for someone else who is exploited to me was much easier than standing up for myself, and that way you can eventually learn to stand up for yourself. For me consumption of stage orange/confrontational stuff was really important. You want to integrate these aspects of stage orange even if you have to consume low consciousness stuff. Two things in particular helped me: Listening to Destiny, here is his channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC554eY5jNUfDq3yDOJYirOQ He does not give a shit what people think of him so there is much to learn from him in this regard. He has some very admirable traits but also some low consciousness stuff that will probably be obvious to you so not much of a problem. Watching these from time to time: https://www.youtube.com/user/VitalyzdTv/ Vitaly is someone who pranks people and it's rather low consciousness, but it gets the job done. He is very good at being playful with how he interacts with people so there is a lot to learn in that regard from him. You can start framing confrontations more like playful interactions instead of ego powerplays. If these don't work out for you find some other stuff that is going to work for you. Maybe even watch some stage orange movies and try to embrace and put yourself into the shoes of some of the more confrontational characters.

Criticizing china in this way is very similar to criticizing a developing child for it's lack of attention or it's inability to be disciplined, or even for it's lack of intelligence. Every country in which freedom is valued had to go through the aspects you are describing as problematic in china. Was the gain of freedom you and all of us are celebrating now worth the slavery and suffering of the generations which lived through robber-baron capitalism and the like? In 100 years noone will bat an eye whether china cared about the health of it's citizen 100 years ago. In 100 years people will celebrate the freedoms and riches they have gained from the exploitation of previous generations. Don't forget that China has been around for thousands of years, they intend to stay around for much longer.

@Synchronicity I will try to stay away from that for now, I want to keep this away from the path others have already created. I don't want there to be expectations. @Serotoninluv I will see if these aspects will manifest themselves, but I don't have desire to seek anything specific. I want it to naturally flow, the more expectations I will have towards what is to come, the less authentic the seeking and exploring will be to me. To me what's more valuable are questions, rather than answers. A question that will resonate with me will do so much more than explaining to me what there will happening in the future. I tried to listen to Leo's 30 Aspects of enlightenment, but I found myself to resist it because it is like telling me about the ending of a movie. What if knowing the ending of the movie will make me change the movie itself? What if telling me the ending of the movie will make me stop watching the movie? @MAYA EL I don't know, I don't even know if I can tell anyone about Redness. I have noticed that my experience in general is "brighter" than it has been before. It is difficult to explain, but previously a lot of my experience had an underlying darkness in the quite literal sense. The space in which visual things are imagined seems to be brighter than it previously was. I did not notice it but before it was quite dark compared to now. The space I am talking about is the space in which you close your eyes and see vague imagined things, that strang space between the visual space and the "beyond" space. I have also noticed that when I think about the path of others my mind seems to have a much easier time putting oneself into that experience and what it entailed. I am rather introverted and for example hate doing things like dancing. Previously I could not even imagine what it would be like to have fun dancing, now my mind is able to imagine it in a way which would be wonderful. A way in which I would let go of all worries and just start dancing, the imagination involves joy, previously it would only involve fear. When I was visiting a hotel I realized that it wasn't at all so distant to actually create a hotel oneself. I got a sense in which it is a very human, grounded thing to create a business, to go through all the experiences and have that kind of ambition. It doesn't feel "official" anymore, if that makes sense? Authority seems to be dissolving, everything in society is basically just human beings trying to figure it out and doing what they can. Society and what it entails seems more personal and less like a cold construction. It feels more like a tree house than anything else. As far as my art goes I have noticed that I can connect far better to the essence of visuals. Despite being a visual artist I was rather visually uncreative previously, as I did not use the power of visualization to the extend which I have discovered to do now. Visualization is an aspect that one has very little control of. For example, if I want to visualize a crocodile and close my eyes, I cannot control what picture will pop into my mind. Infact the harder I try the less likely it will be that I see anything. If I let go and just let it happen, if I loosen up into the visualization process, I can experience quite vivid pictures, to a degree that it almost seems to resemble a kind of cheapish photographic memory, without being able to choose what memory will be retrieved. It is a little like I had access to the same process that is there when dreaming, I am very happy about that, and I am sure it's a skill that needs to be developed. In general I have experienced more carelessness, greater open-mindedness and much less ego attachment to everything. It actually is quite surprising to me, it does not really feel deserved. I seems like I did not do enough hard work to have "attained" what I have attained. There is a sense of slow creeping of lightness that is somehow being upheld. A previously very delicate process during meditation which could easily have been disturbed seems to be effortless now, like something happening in the background. I don't worry about it at all. There is a sense of the cold ground upon which I stood fading and I can see the colorful depth beneath. I would say all of this is very contrary to my expectations, which is why I do not care anymore to construct new expectations. I don't want to hear about the enlightenment process anymore, I don't care about what is going to happen. The sense of childhood mystery, in which the world was unexplained and needed to be explored, is coming back into my experience.

I find myself getting more and more alienated from a lot of the spiritual concepts that I have been ingrained with in the past few years. The more I do this work, the less I find these concepts to be truthful and attractive. For example, these concepts do not make sense to me anymore: Mind Consciousness Imagination Meditation Subjectivity Enlightenment Increasing Consciousness Unconditional Love "In silence you will find Truth" Strong determination sitting Liberation Ego Truth Absolute A lot of the language Leo is using does not resonate with me anymore, and I actually loved it not that long ago. Actually I find that a lot of spiritual talking to me is kind of weirdly delusional. It feels pretentious, it feels sheepish. It feels so uncreative and stale. When I listen to Alan Watts for example I feel like there is this playfulness which lacks in a lot of other teachings. I have a desire to explore celebration, activity, swimming, whirling, playing (in the metaphysical sense, not hobbies). I would love to see some Viking ceremonies, or some Shamanic dances. An embrace of fluidity and playfulness. I want magicalness, I want wonder and awe. There is a sense of fairytale-ness. I think I want Groundlessness. I want movement that is motionless, not motionless movement. I want Joke, Play instead of Truth, Absolute. Maybe all this feels like restriction and I find myself to embrace freedom. Instead of "Sit down and meditate" I see results in "Listen to music and contemplate until contemplation falls apart". Results in Flow rather than Stillness. Expanding into Being, giving being Presence instead of observation, seeing truth, etc. There is this sense of ridiculousness coming, a Trickster who laughs at the seriousness of Zen Monks, who laughs at the concepts of Leo, who laughs at itself. I don't know how else to describe it, it does not seem egoic, it does not seem attached or survivalistic. Rather it feels the opposite of that. It's like it cannot denie magic, and thus it cannot take any of this too seriously. It also has a sense of Love and Acceptance. It seeks active compassion, it seeks art and creativity. Previously when I looked at "enlightenment" I saw darkness, I saw stillness, I saw detachment. "Nothingness". Now it looks colorful, it looks impossible, it looks like a fairy-tale. It feels tumultuous, waves of endless color and feeling crashing against each other. It feels like a huge orchestra of magic, it feels like taking you by the hand and swirling you around. It is laughing, it is crying, it is alive. It looks at Leo's castle of non-duality and wants to swoop it away with a tsunami of creativity and playfulness. This is the path that I see, and I think Leo's talk of Love has helped me see it more clearly. But I feel like Leo got there in a different way, the path he took does not seem to be the path that seems attractive to me, but I think the change in direction he has taen is what I really like. But the foundation upon which his castle is build feels serious, and despite him putting the cream of Love and passion on top of it now, the foundation seems to still remain, if that makes sense? I will obviously still find use in all of the content Leo produces, but I don't know if I can be a "follower" anymore, in the sense that I don't know if I don't want to create my own path, using Leo's videos as an addition instead of a main diet. I don't want any diet that comes from someone else anymore. I want to create my own diet. I want to explore myself even if I am not utterly successful. This very attitude of being so serious about this pathway seem unattractive to me. It seems to suck the joy and curiousity out of this path. I want to feel fairytale-ness, magic, compassion, playfulness not "industrial grade enlightenment practice". Does anyone know what I mean? To me it feels like there is a very ingrained bias of a certain way of looking at all this that is very present in the general culture of spiritualism. This bias seems to become more and more apparent to me, and I start seeing it everywhere. I want to explore a different perspective, or rather what I have explored does not seem entirely compatible with this current bias.