Joseph Maynor

How is experiencing one state gonna cause egoless to become more permanently awake?

I recall watching an interview with a guru who said that “Enlightenment is not for everyone.” He said only certain people are genuinely called to the Enlightenment Path. He didn’t mean that others can’t handle it. He meant something more like — it’s not the right path for them. It was an interesting perspective that stuck with me. I’m not taking a position on that either way.

This is why I say it’s dumb to be proud to be awake. That’s just how ‘your’ story played out. It couldn’t have happened otherwise. ‘You’ could have been a bum on the street too, and similarly have no control over the matter.

If everybody agreed with me, then I would start to worry haha. I would start to think — whattaya you want from me! Don’t worry about people disagreeing with you. Opinions are like bellybuttons, everybody has one. I like it when people disagree with me. That shows they are thinking for themselves — or at least attempting to. That’s a virtue! It takes balls and principles to disagree with somebody. I always say — please argue with me. I don’t wanna be agreed with. I don’t need to justify feeling right to anybody. We all have different perspectives. There’s no one-sized-fits-all correct philosophical view of reality. There’s just your view. And the only live question for you is — can I improve my view? Don’t worry about what anybody else thinks in the first instance. Worry about if you can improve your view of things. And then maybe you’ll influence others later on with your refined view of reality. But don’t worry about what other people say or think about you. That reflects on them not on you. If you can help them, great, if they can help you, great — but the disagreement aspect alone is not that significant. If people are agreeing with you a bunch, then maybe you have something to start worrying about! It’s like “yes men” when you get rich and famous, right? Everything you say is smart and funny now! That’s total BS though — it’s butt-kissing. I think humans are programmed to disagree more than agree with other humans. I expect that and celebrate that. If people aren’t disagreeing, then they probably aren’t thinking.

Frankston’s view is pretty strong too. We don’t get offended by things that we’re completely detached from.

This is great! I enjoy the way it’s made easy for everyone to understand.

If you ask two lawyers for an opinion — you’ll get three opinions.

Very nice. I haven’t studied Osho yet.

In a sense nothing changes with enlightenment. All that changes if your identification with and connection to a Dream that you never had any control over to begin with. So, the circle completes itself. Accept the little you in the Dream — it’s not yours! The little you in the Dream is no more you than the little anyone else in the Dream. The only Matrix is Ego — a false set of beliefs about reality. Why would you ever want to go back to suffering and ignorance? That tells me the jackpot on the Path hasn’t been hit yet.

Before enlightenment, carry water, chop wood; after enlightenment, carry water, chop wood.

I'm a fan of Cosmopolitanism. When you're exposed to a lot of differences, it's hard to form too many prejudices. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmopolitanism

Just let go of Ego and let whatever happens happen.

An hour is a nice long meditation. I usually meditate for 30 mins. 20 mins is the shortest amount of time I like to meditate. I try to meditate every morning.

Get audiobooks and listen to them at twice speed. The Audible app lets you do this. Sometimes I do it. I try to only listen to audiobooks now so that I can adjust the reading speed to the way I want it.

Cremated. I don't think it's necessary for me to take up space in the Earth after I'm gone.

What if neither the Harvard Lawyer nor the Islamic Fundamentalist chose their lives? What if that's just the way things are? We assume the president of Fortune 500 Company and a bum on the street are different in some way. What if neither had a choice? What if that's just the way reality is? And how can you say that one person's life is objectively better than another's? Maybe the bum on the street is totally content with his life and the fortune 500 guy is looking to jump off a bridge somewhere.

What is consistent is just sensations not necessarily a material world. We could be Phenomenalists and take what is sensed as what is real -- all the while rejecting the Materialist Paradigm. So, consistency in sensations alone do not prove the beliefs that constitute the Materialist Paradigm. A Phenomenalist takes the sensations to be real, but is not a realist as to the External World -- or the Mechanistic World. That requires beliefs that go beyond the sensations. You could re-frame your question this way -- Why are sensations so consistent? Why do sensations often behave in a pattern of behavior, often predictable? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenomenalism

The Absolute is always here, it's not a state.

It's hard for the tongue to taste itself. It's hard for Awareness to notice itself. Reality hides in plain sight. The problem arises due to our conditioning that truth comes via beliefs. Truth is pre-conceptual actually. People need to slow down and reconnect with that more basic mundane reality. That reality that is always lurking there, but rarely paid any attention to directly. We are bedazzled by thoughts. We run off with thoughts like children with toys. How can we pay attention to reality when we're always thinking about something? It's because consciousness is so mundane that it doesn't notice itself. Awareness is not sexy, it's not dazzling, it's not distracting. It's just always there.

I think one of the major themes that the Buddha was teaching is that nothing is separate. Everything is one unified whole.

Leo has no choice as to how his life is going or where he's gonna end up. Neither does Eckhart Tolle.

Unchanging Awareness is not anyone's mind. This was a major insight for me. This broke me away from the psychological conception of Ego. The mistake I was making was assuming 'my mind' was Awareness.

Where does growth stop?

Here's a deep question: What is a concept? Notice that even asking this question has some philosophical baggage to it. What am I presupposing to even ask this question? What are my expectations for what the answer should look like?

Idealism is conceptual. Non-duality is not conceptual. Non-duality is best pointed to as follows: BE-ing unchanging Awareness.