Nahm

@preventingdiabetes Make a dreamboard and they will inevitably both come to fruition and will be realized to be one in the same.

Consciousness is goodness.

They didn’t really. Asexual reproduction preceded sexual reproduction. A ‘they’ hasn’t technically happened. Congrats btw.

@billiesimon Great work! ”Sober states” “non sober states” “states”....all still actually the very same Mind. Maybe you didn’t experience ego backlash from the trips, but unknowingly the resistance you were applying (and labelling backlash) of ‘this isn’t It’, ‘that was It’, while this ‘sober’ is It. Like, associating It to a substance, missing the actuality of the substance is also just Mind. Same as the couch.

@Someone here Oh sorry man. Didn’t mean anything in a personal sense. From a certain perspective intention is paramount within a thread on loa.

You said “I seek genuine understanding”. I’m suggesting genuine is to be found within you, not in any understanding. Sounds semantical, but another way to say it is seeking directed back inward to itself which is seeking, rather than conceptually outward. The attribute of genuine was being ‘placed on’ the apparent object “understanding”, rather than the subject. ‘Sweet Emotion’ is a literal and figurative example of this as the point of the song is that the stories told in it are not the point of the song. The emotion, is the point. Meaning can not be ‘a point’, because while it may seem like it’s ‘coming’ out to in, it’s being made up in to out. Lastly I was pointing out that self vs no self, and likewise selfish vs selfless, are thoughts, still meaning, in to out, so to speak. I wrote with the intention that the writing would not fit into the present ‘box’ understanding seemed to be in, leaving it to intention. The hope was the seeing of the distinction between thinking, meaning, understanding in this regard as more duality, vs genuine being ‘found’ in intention. Genuine in intention is feeling, genuine in understanding is thinking about ‘genuine’. The reference to ‘Why Can’t This Be Love’ as the only worthwhile pontification is because it is, and contemplating why it can’t be will bring all the flotsam & jetsam of purification up and out.

@Forestluv Indeed. All ID’s are fake ID’s. Lol. In a way, the real crime is the distinction that the one was real.

@EmptyVase A you and a world can sync to the degree they weren’t even separate to begin with. Rather than writing down what happened, write down what you want to happen. Likewise, the past & future can sync together to the degree there was only ever now.

It’s weird to think of yourself as a substance, but oddly it inevitably becomes weirder to think of yourself as a person, of even at all.

Attribute on wrong ‘thingy’. In. Tense. Tion. It’s found in the realization you’re being it. If indeed, you are. Real. I. Say. Tion. (Tion: makes a verb of a noun, which there isn’t, which is why the suffix) Example of Genuine. Literal, figurative, apparent & realness. Such is meaning arising from you which appears to be here. The only sensible pontification. You’re kicking yourself. That much is unequivocal. The feels or the balls, that is a freedom of yours, and yours alone. (You know neither a self nor a no self, selfishness nor selflessness, sans thinking. If you’re to not believe the thoughts, make it whole.) @Thestarguitarist14 Beautiful, beautiful, beautiful. Got me in the feels.

@Raptorsin7 I’m really seriously curious...do you realize that if I focused on those thoughts about myself, that I would feel exactly like you do when you do? Sometimes I wonder if maybe you’re repeating the story of you so much that you miss we are all the same in this regard. To actually check this, sound weird, but, you could literally say those things to someone else about them, ‘to their face’, and notice how they feel.

Not ‘can be used’, is already underway. And I’m experiencing that reality you’re creating, and co creating. If one of us was creating another experience there wouldn’t be this one. There is a subtle distinction in loa, in that you are aligning vibrationally in an on going fluid manor, vs moving up in distinct levels of consciousness. In my understanding of loa, all points of view are level, or, parallel, in a rather intimate manor. I feel I understand what you’re saying, I just haven’t seen it to really compare. Loa wise, see the reference to what other’s think or believe as only your own subjective interpretation. Try out that lens. “If ‘people’ miss deeper truths, it is me missing a deeper truth”. “If ‘people’ are dogmatic, my own judgement is the ultimate dogma”. Total accountability. “Bring it ALL home”, if you will.

@Consept Yes. That ‘it’ is all hay, oneself entirely, and how it is functioning as in “unfolding” subjectivity via attraction, more so then measurements being pertinent of useful. It wouldn’t be outlandish imo to say that loa is an exploration of all ‘corners’ of ‘one’s own’ infinite being. As a journey or adventurous undertaking, the starting place being you’re literally creating reality, and inquiring in real-time-life if you will, as to how this is literally true. The experiencing of the discovery itself, the ride, being the greatest possible “reward” itself, far, far beyond any ‘haylike’ ‘thing’, yet inclusive of. @Fran11 Nice!

@Consept It’s like saying there isn’t hay in a hay stack because it can’t be found.

Loa is quite subjective oriented, so for the sake of grasping it, it is helpful to notice when one switches to a view on behalf of others, as a first person perspective claim, it is a view no longer grounded in direct experience. Thought thinking itself is actually one (circular) thought. A thought has no need for a thinker, and neither thought nor thinking are actually a happening. I get there is apparently to the extent there is talking about it, but the talking is intended to point to what is yet seen. You can consciously create with crayons, without a need for a crayoner. You wouldn’t even stop to think about wether there is a crayoner or not. Likewise, free will has no need of a free willer. You are neither free will, nor not free will, as those are thoughts you’re aware of. Loa In that regard isn’t a theory within the whole of experience, but is a pointer to what is indicative of the whole of experience, as subjectively as can be heard. It’s a finger pointing to the moon. Like the phrase ‘notice your direct experience’ is just words, but it points differently than ‘have some popcorn’ or the phrase ‘it’s just a finger’ without looking to the moon. If you were to edit that section / comment by changing each objective reference which is outside of subjective direct experience, and all logic which is accredited to the references, back to the whole of it being subjective... what’d remain would be pointed to by ‘the loa’. What about the direct experience that there isn’t a Leo? That has an obnoxious on my part for saying it ring to it. But then bring it back to subjective and consider it’s actually direct experience, and again it really drives home loa. ?

But beyond what you are saying I can call something and wether you have a problem with it...what do you think for yourself, so to speak? Yes indeed, again, the man’s a legend....but what do you think for yourself? The implication is potentially astounding. If thought is magic, and thought defines ‘spiral dynamics’, then magic can’t be said to be found within spiral dynamics, let alone at purple. This would also be true for the thoughts, ‘Leo’, ‘loa’ & ‘reality’. (Not magic from the thoughts, not magical thoughts in comparison to ‘normal’ thoughts, not subject object, but thought being made of magic, or magical happening.)

@Shiva99 Sorry to hear of the rough recent ride and congrat’s on the new job. Things will get better. On the pride & shame spectrum, one way to look at it is to scrutinize self referential thinking, the freedom to which, is feeling. Consider, in thinking about yourself in the manor of proud of yourself, there seems to be a ‘self’ there in that thinking...while in actuality you are still ‘positioned’ ‘furthest back’, as the awareness of the arising thoughts...about a ‘you’...which there isn’t (again, you are the awareness of X, no matter what X is). If you’re getting what I’m saying here, consider more simply the good feeling of proud that you are rising above the challenges of living you’re facing. It can be interpreted as confirming of the power of your attitude and choices. Likewise, shame requires two parties. Either you and another person...or you (awareness) and the thought of you, which is not an actuality, outside of being, a thought. A thought can’t really be about you. Anything else really, but never you. You are always the eternal awareness prior to the thoughts. Spending a little time with this (if it seems complex at first) can bust the cycle of self referential thinking to such a liberating degree, that as ‘thoughts of old’ arise (“about yourself”), they arise in the clarity which you literally truly are, and what stressed you out and held you back of old, quite literally becomes joyful and a funny. I don’t mean any offense in putting it that way, But hope it’s taken as a pointer to the immeasurable power you really have available in simply being you, without the facade of limited thinking about ‘you’.

@Consept In hindsight I’m wondering if that made any sense as I could’ve said it more clearly. It points to that you’re not ‘just’ the person, but what is appearing as the entirety of the ‘experience’ which includes the ‘person’. If it does make sense, I would look to intention, in the sense, feeling the roots of your perspectives, as a sort of damn which allows or resists the love that you are into this place. If it were the case that a certain inherent ‘design’ of this place requires the focus of the experiencing of the world & the perspectives therein to be ‘self’ serving, perhaps it could be said to inevitably lead to focus being Self serving. In kind fear & anxiety could be said to be inevitable, but yet ultimately non-existent.

@Consept The possibility that thought is magic in and of yourSelf could be considered. It’s also possible that Leo is self aware / self realized to a degree you aren’t comprehending such that even ‘loa’ has revealed ‘itself’ to be ‘his’ very Infinite Self. As in, loa is typically a ‘person & things the person wants means’ context yet to be recognized as introductory to the actuality of Self realization. His videos imo articulate this rather expertly & in a ground breaking intimate manor, such that the intention is your own realization that you are what is appearing as this ‘universe / world’. That you are right now creating ‘it’ via being ‘it’ is (just imo) the overarching message “he” is presenting, by quite literally being. That loa is the intrinsic can’t-be-otherwise ‘order’ of the unconditional love ‘we’ are referring to as a ‘he’, and if you will, the ‘situation’ of subjectivity fully realized, aka, the whole of reality. @Thestarguitarist14 Appreciating what you’re communicating. On a housekeeping note, name calling is prohibited in the forum guidelines. If I am creating reality, and there is an asshole, it is in fact, me.

@Tearos You’re inquiry points to the transcending of all of the thought stories of the finite mind. All narratives that you’re a human with needs, essentially. The transcending of the finite mind “itself”, and as such the “returning” Home. This human appearance is not the actual case but certainly viscerally looks & feels as such, which is not a random coincidence, but an invitation to the metadventure of uncovering the truth of reality & self. There is much to sift through, and incredible “layers” of nuance already afoot to be aligned. The ‘way’ is ‘way less’, as in, it is not falling for the stories of the mind, even as the body is wrenched in the release of the deepest and most intimate beliefs about self & world. There is no ‘getting somewhere’, as that is always another such story of the finite mind. There is only letting go. Consciousness, Truth, rises, ‘fills’, every nook & cranny of what is let go, and seen through via the illumination which emanates from within. This can occur in sudden fashion with methods like psychedelics, retreats, etc, as well as more subtly over time with daily meditation, yoga, ever changing of preferences aligning in well being, in terms of body & mind. However, no catalyst of any kind could be said to be ‘needed’, which is a difficult thing to not-understand, or to let go of the very belief in needing to understand it. The ‘trick’ if you will, is noticing this is always the case. It is most fundamental to the experiencing of ‘reality’. More practically speaking, contemplate need vs want, for any and all matters which you experience discord between what you’re thinking and what you’re feeling. Notice the subtlest of differences in feeling, between “I need her, him, this thing, or that thing”...and “I don’t need that, I can let the mind clear and again realize that I am the very happiness”. Thus, there is a renewed freedom in the wanting, known more to be the literal creating of reality in every moment, as you go about experience.

@Sorwyn You might say the love bubbles up in the body and is known and felt as such. When we forge relationships and feeling, thinking, and planning are involved, sometimes the mind dualizes the feeling and we hold perspectives that the feeling is coming from someone else, or is produced by the relationship. The feeling is reality, you might say the universe, I would say simply you. When a relationship ends, in a way the extent to which the mind melded the knowing & understanding of the feeling as attributed to the other person, there can be a visceral feeling (with interpretation) of loss. But the love is always ‘within’ you. ‘Love & learn’, uncovering the love within yourself as you go, realize it is ‘there’ in you to be given and experienced for all people, and all things as after all, it is / you are and there are unlimited manifesting expressions. There’s something to be said for the ‘bond’ felt within for someone more specifically on your ‘wavelength’, or a ‘vibrational match’ which can be experienced in matters of love as more intense, more ‘all consuming’ of the whole experience. It appears even more convincing that there is love produced by that relationship. Yet, what can be experienced as ‘loss’ (with focusing on certain perspectives) can also be a very strong pointing of clarity to just where the love, reality, is emanating from, and insight via ‘dialing into’ the feeling can reveal the falsity of the ‘loss’ narrative of thought / duality. It could be said such experiences point to a truth, in that love can never really be created or destroyed. It would not be uncommon for plans to have been thought about in repetition, say, relative to finances, a potential life together, etc, and for the ‘loss of the love’ to be specifically felt in corresponding areas of the body, reflected in models like the chakra’s (the stomach pain). I would make a dreamboard, take note of what was uplifting, what the experience helped you to more clearly know you are wanting, and write on your board and focus on that, which can bring a gratitude and appreciation to the hindsight perspective of the experience. In ‘the universe’ sense, the same love perhaps thought to be produced by the ‘connection’ with another, is ever present ‘for you’ without any reason or condition, and is always at the ready to infuse into your creating of the life you most desire to create. I would go so far as to say that such experiences serve your ‘opening’ up to the notion that you are quite literally being showered with love in every moment, and this can not only be felt and known, but flip reality itself, the universe and you, ‘inside out’. There is also something to be said for the ‘role’ of understanding in such a close frequency connection. It feels very good to be understood, and to really ‘get’ or understand someone in a deep meaningful way. As such, there can be a thin veneer of thought & perspective which covers this relationship between understanding and or being understood, and the wonderful feelings associated with the experience. If you take a few deep breathes, and essentially ‘ask’ feeling, or perhaps ‘ask the body’, so to speak, you can fill ‘it’ be contemplating / feeling the unity within which is love-understanding, or understanding-love. To be a bit blunt for the sake of clarity...that the mind added layers of thought to the feeling ‘itself’ can be healed and seen through, via the contemplating in feeling. Understanding & love can be known ‘within’, as one. This can have a profound effect in terms of going forward in life in matters of relationships & love, as the love ‘itself’ known within you is no longer thought to be in potential jeopardy. You might still get your heart broken, etc, but love more deeply ‘known’ arises in response to such thoughts as, you might say the real relationship - the one between ‘you & your, is clearer and more realize, and felt, and there is much certainty where there was uncertainty, much inspiration and understanding where perhaps there was worry and a certain misinterpretation of ‘risking’ the heart, as in a ‘loss’ of this love that always, forever, eternally, is, and as such is inseparable from ‘you’. So maybe the universe is always communicating with you, and maybe it’s not in thinking or talking, yet, a ‘commune’ of One, a ‘communion’... a “communication”...which is always known and present nonetheless. You might even go so far as to say the heartbreak, and any soreness of it, recontextualizes itself into a win, on the plain of a profound insight into the actuality of reality. I’m not sure what one would call that, but it seems to be.

@Tim R Thanks, I forgot to put the link... https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/319631

@electroBeam

Different approaches work for different folks, my approach has always only been for the fun, for the experience. I tend to love uncertainty, and it’s hard to say if that has been helpful.

@Fadl Maybe you could ask @mandyjw to explain the humor of it to you. Maybe she will utilize the opportunity to throw me under the bus, which imo, would be much funnier. When you realize that you are not male or female, that their aren’t any, as, so to speak, Mandy and I have, new dimensions of humor open up to you.