Forestluv

Starting threads without context are discouraged. Please provide some context at the start of the OP for the thread.

Who/what is the author of the book about sausagehead and his dog? Who/what is the author of the book about an author that wrote a book about sausagehead and his dog? Who/what is the author of the book about an author that wrote a book about an author that wrote a book about sausagehead and his dog? Off we go into infinity. . . No Authors = All Authors

@Existence You might be entering a deeper level of contemplation that is not limited by reason and conceptual constructs. We can create conceptual constructs about god and what god experiences, yet there is also an "ISness" that cannot be captured through theoretical constructs trying to define what IS is. For example, "If. . . . then. . . " constructs have an underlying assumption. In the question above, we are assuming that there is a thing called god that has no desire to do anything? Do we know that is true? How do we know that is true? . . . Quite often, we are not even aware of our assumptions. When we become aware of the underlying assumption, the rest of the question becomes mute. For example, what if god does have desire to do something? Then the question is recontextualized or dissolves. Fundamental to these questions is a thing called "existence". What is existence? How can we distinguish between existence and non-existence? Who determines whether it counts as existence or non-existence. Could there be an in-between of "quasi-existence"? What is the difference between "reality" and "no reality"? Is there one reality or countless realities? Does a human and a donkey share the same reality? Whose reality is more real? Is waking reality more real than a dream reality? Is there a separate thing called "god" that is imagining this reality? If so, who/what imagines that god? These types of questions are designed to pull the mind out of logical, reasonable thinking. Similar to zen koans. As well, there is a "trans-human" ISness that is not contracted within a human perspective. It can be fun to create constructs to these questions. It can also be insightful to question the questions.

This gets into the "I AM" realization. People are conditioned to add on to the "I AM" and identify with that add-on. Then a personal story arises. For example: "I AM. . . a man". Here there is identification of being "a man" and a man story follows. . . "I AM a man. As a man, I am more masculine than woman. As a man, I should be assertive and decisive. I should take control". . . Or another story may arise, depending on the conditioning of the human. . . Or "I AM Russian", "I AM an artist", "I AM a person with ADD", "I AM often insecure" , "I AM smart", "I AM stupid". . . and on and on and on. . . See what happens when there is only "I AM". Just that I AMness - with nothing extra added on. What is the direct experience of simply "I AM"?

@JonasVE12 Imagine there is a green marble and a blue marble. We can create separation and say there are two individual marbles - the green one and the blue one. Notice how there is no attachment/identification to either marble. We don't say "I am the green marble and you are the blue marble". Now imagine there are two individual human bodies. Notice the attachment/identification. The mind thinks "I am this individual person and they are that individual person". Here, there is not just individuality of two human bodies - there is an additional attachment/identification to individuality. That attachment/identification add-in is ego.

I think this is a great question. It's something I've contemplated a lot myself. It reminds me of my first two Ayahuasca ceremonies. . . During the first ceremony, the whole story of "me" was deconstructed. At first, it was odd and a bit uncomfortable. Yet then I noticed that the deconstruction/transcendence of me was kinda cool. I was one with everyone at the ceremony. I was one with the music. I felt such deep love. I was fully in the moment. I walked outside and the mountains in the moonlight was so mystical and beautiful. I thought "How have I missed such beauty my entire life?". At the end of the ceremony, we all sat around eating fruit together. It was so beautiful, fulfilling and blissful. . . Two days later, the second ceremony was much different. As my story got deconstructed, there were lessons that appeared. Lessons about how my personality was created. For example, how hyper self-criticism during my life conditioned a subconscious insecurity complex. And how this subconscious insecurity affected my subconscious interactions with other people. This was uncomfortable to look at. I wanted to go back to the fulfilling, blissful realm of the first ceremony. I tried to steer things away from the insecurity to bliss, yet didn't have control. Then anxiety appeared. Overall, they were uncomfortable lessons to look at, yet they revealed insight into my subconscious programming. What had been subconscious was now conscious. One reason it was subconscious was that I didn't want to look at it. . . This expanded consciousness/awareness allowed the letting go of the underlying psychological dynamic. This allowed for a greater sense of liberation and wellness.

Everyone has a certain level of mental background noise. The yoga may have raised your awareness. If it’s just a slight background you find peaceful, you are fortunate.

Transcend the desire to objectively analyze different POVs. Objective analysis is stage Orange. Yellow is about integrative, systemic, relativistic modes of being. For example, Yellow can comfortably hold two opposing POVs without grasping. Yellow understands paradox and is fluid. Perhaps read more about what Yellow is like. My favorite book in this are is "How to think like Leonardo Da Vinci". Imo, Da Vinci is a great example of Yellow.

There are ways we can treat the mind and body lovingly to minimize unnecessary suffering along the path. For example, we wouldn't want to traumatize the mind and body by taking a large dose of psychedelics on an airplane. This is not a good setting for a large dose and could needlessly cause trauma and PTSD. . . Yet, there is a certain amount of discomfort inherent in transcending the ego. For me, there have been periods of high anxiety. So, I've tried to be kind to my mind and body and not give it more than it can handle. It's also possible to go through ego backlash, periods of depression and "what's the point? why do anything" spaces. You say that you are motivated to make your life better and more fulfilling. Ime, as I got to the deeper levels more and more was surrendered: including my life and fulfillment. There are a lot of spiritual areas that focus on improving life and fulfillment. Yet there are also areas in which all of that is deconstructed and transcended. I would be mindful of what your desires are. If your desires are life improvement/fulfillment and you enter areas in which your life, improvement and fulfillment get deconstructed and transcended, it could be counter to the desires of the mind and body - causing a lot distress. As Leo quoted in a recent video "It's all fun and games until someone loses and *I*". . . The desire to know Truth regardless of the consequences on life improvement and fulfillment is a different orientation. I'm not saying one is better than the other. Yet I would be mindful about which rabbit holes I go down and how far down I go.

@Pernani Are you asking this out of theoretical curiosity? Or are you asking because you want to continue down a spiritual path and want to minimize the potential suffering you may encounter? These are two very different orientations. For example, I may be curious in theory whether it's possible to learn how to scuba dive without any anxiety. That is very different than if I am actually going to go scuba diving for the first time and since I've had anxiety disorders, I'm worried about going into panic during the dive and I want to minimize the chance of that happening.

@Swagala Personally, I don't find it helpful to compare my insides to other people's outsides.

@arlin There are some nuggets in there about relative truth, yet imo the way you frame it sounds like a resistant ego trying to control the narrative the mind.

@Pernani I think what you are getting at is the actual experience rather than intellectual conceptualization. As Leo quoted in his recent video "It's all fun and games until someone loses an *I*". It can be fun and games discussing it intellectually in cafes and on forums, yet when it's time to face the music, the experience can be uncomfortable at times. I'm imagining climbing Mt. Everest. Thinking about it can be intriguing and exciting. Yet actually doing it and experiencing it is different. I imagine those that actually climb Mt. Everest have undergone some uncomfortable mental and physical conditions. In addition to feeling motivated and adventurous, I'm sure there are times when they feel fearful and anxious. They may face frostbite or hypothermia. They may face a technical challenge they are unsure they can do. At times they may be empowered, other times insecure. There are times when they feel they can't handle it and out. There aren't any guarantee how the journey will unfold. For some it may be relatively smooth, for others it may involve a lot of suffering. Yet I would think those that make it to the top of Mt. Everest place the top as the top. There are times when reaching the top is more important than security and comfort. . . Imagine a hiker considering Mt. Everest saying "I don't want to suffer during this ascent. Is suffering necessary?". . . It's not so much whether suffering is necessary or not. It's that this mentality will likely be a huge block. As soon as this hiker faces discomfort, what will happen? They will turn around. Similarly, when a mindset is asking "Will seeking Truth involve suffering?" or "What is seeking Truth doesn't benefit me?" - there are huge barriers. Along the path, as soon as one faces discomfort or sacrifice, they will bail. Yet this doesn't mean we need to manufacture suffering. Someone climbing Mt. Everest shouldn't do it naked to manufacture suffering. The person can wear warm clothing and bring supplementary CO2. Similarly, we can be kind to the mind and body along the path. For example, we wouldn't take 200ug of LSD and jump into a pitful of snakes. This would traumatize the mind and body and likely cause PTSD issues that the mind and body would need to work through.

That sucks. It goes against the whole spirit of education - learning, growing and expanding.

@Nivsch Because the human ego wants to control the narrative. Of course the human ego will place itself as the most sacred, the most important and the most developed. For example, humans grant themselves a “right to life” and deny all other life forms a “right to life”. Humans like to define “development” as things like the ability to use tools, reason, self awareness. Yet dismiss other forms of development / abilities like collective consciousness in wolf packs and starling murmurs. Or consider human constructs of “enlightenment”. Isn’t it interesting how enlightenment constructs are relative to humans? These constructs are created and exclusive to humans. Non-human entities are excluded. I see many humans flock to “enlightened” humans to learn about human constructs of enlightenment. So much talk about which humans are most enlightened. . . Yet much rarer do I see a human allow a tree to be their teacher of enlightenment. This would require trans-human consciousness. It’s like taking a group of kids to an ice cream parlor and asking “OK, who wants to have ice cream first?”. Of course they will all scream “ME!!”.

It’s not that human life is secondary. What you are doing is placing human life as primary. This is a very human-centric biased view. You are arguing for humans. Why aren’t you arguing for for the sacredness of dung beetle life? Why aren’t you arguing that butterfly life is not secondary compared to humans or anything else? . . . Humans are not secondary to anything else, yet they are not primary to anything else. Human extinction is a concern to humans. Yet from a trans-human perspective, human extinction is no more worrisome than extinction of ants. Who cares if humans go extinct. Most of Earth’s history had no humans and in many ways, Earth would be better off without humans. . .

@Javfly33 A few thoughts: 1. Low/moderate doses of psychedelics can be great for dissolving the sense of self and revealing one-ness without going into some bizarro reality. Yet keep in mind, that when the conditioned mind returns, it will want to contextualize the experience and make sense of it. The mind may create all sorts of thought stories. These can have practical value for the person/human, yet these thought stories aren't actual - they are contextualizations. The human mind has attachments/identification to a thought story of "me". At a deeper level, there is attachment/identification to experience and feelings. Awareness of all this is a major expansion. Yet the awareness doesn't mean the underlying attachment/identification to that self dissolves. There is recognition and there is embodiment. 2. Recognizing the illusory nature of self does not mean conditioned impulses in the mind-body will suddenly stop. A nondual realization will not cure someone's broken leg and will not stop pain impulses in the mind and body. It is the relationship to those impulses that changes. There is an energetic shift. Mentally, it may be a "game-changer" and relieve a lot of personal anxiety and neuroses. Yet conditioned neurotic impulses may still appear in the mind. 3. The human mind is conditioned to perceive duality it's entire life. The first glimpses of nonduality will seem radical and cause a sense of instability and groundlessness. The mind might start thinking "Who am I?", "Do I even exist?", "What is the point of doing anything in life?". This can cause discomfort in the mind and body. . . I am a big proponent of following one's true desires. If the mind and body reacts with strong resistance/anxiety and says "Whoa, this is too much - we need to slow down and get our life together" - I would honor that. We don't want to traumatize the mind and body. If you were climbing Mt. Everest and the body started hyper-ventilating and went into hypothermia, we would pause and allow the body to recover. 4. Follow your true desires. All there is, is this moment you are having right now. This moment is Home. The deepest human desire is to return Home to this moment.

Glimpses of nonduality are often contextualized as solipsism by the personal self. Solipsism is a cognitive construct - there is a prior to that construct. Solipsism is still dualistic. It sees others as unreal and it's self as real. Therefore thoughts like "i am all alone" arise. That is only a half-truth. If others are not real, that means that i am not real as well. This is the next step: to realize "i am not real". You keep using the terms "i" and "me" in a personal context. How can "i" be all alone if there is no "i"? There is no "i" to be all alone. Nonduality is much more radical. In nonduality ALL selves are nonexistent. Other selfs and my self do not exist. Cloaking a personal "me" as a transcendent "Me" is a sneaky trick of the ego. Remove the cloak and realize there is no "me". There is no point to all your questions because they all assume there is a thing called "me". Consider the following questions: How much money do I need to invest in feeding my unicorn? Where is the best place to train my baby unicorn to fly? How can I keep my unicorn in my yard? Won't it fly away? Do I need to get a licence to own a unicorn? I have two dogs that are very territorial - how can I protect my baby unicorn from my dogs? . . . We could go on and on and on. . . All of these questions are a waste of time because they all assume that a unicorn is real. . . The questions are a distraction - it is much more important to realize there is no unicorn. When one realizes there is no unicorn, all the unicorn questions dissolve. . . Similarly, these questions about "me" assume there is a "me". This is a distraction from realizing there is no me. Once this is realized, all the "me" questions dissolve.

I would be cautious of creating a standard of success to be a permanent nirvana-like state in which I have zero "bad" desires and 100% "good" desires in which I am happily motivated to be productive all the time and spend 100% of my time being productive and engaging in self improvement and spiritual practices. That standard is just so unreasonable and it sets the person up for failure. . . It would be like me wanting to get back into good physical shape - yet my standard for being in good physical shape is: never missing a single day of working out under any circumstances, never eating any snacks or candy, having 5% body fat, bench pressing 150% of my body weight and winning an olympic gold medal in both weightlifting and the marathon. I would just be setting myself up for failure. With this standard of success, as soon as I fall short I will think "see, I knew I would fail. I might as well go back to playing video games all day and eating potato chips". For personal transformation, I think it's much better to develop healthy habits incrementally and have attainable goals - both short-term goals and long term goals - yet not be so demanding and rigid that I sabotage myself and set myself up for failure. For example, a goal of running at least 5 miles everyday is too rigid. What if I am sick one day and it would be unhealthy to run? What if I get a minor injury and running on it would seriously injure myself? A better goal might be "I am committed to 45min. of exercise five days a week". This provides structure, yet also flexibility. Regarding freedom of addiction, it depends. . . I still have desires that would be considered "spiritually incorrect". That is part of the human experience. I wouldn't want to live without some of those desires. Yet I also wouldn't want my life to be constantly driven by those desires. . . Regarding specific addictions, yes some can be completely overcome. The strongest addiction in my life was chewing tobacco. I was mentally and physically addicted hardcore. I tried to quit for many years and kept failing. . . Quitting that habit was one of the hardest thing I've ever done. My mind and body was obsessed and I thought I would never be free of the physical and mental addiction. Yet with time it got less and less intense. I would say it took about two years to become completely free. I have not had a single desire or craving to chew tobacco for over 15 years. I don't even think about it. Even the thought of it doesn't arise. It's a non-issue in my life. So yes, it is possible to become 100% free from an addiction.

I like traveling as healthy entertainment. It is fun, engaging and intriguing. A lot can be learned through direct experience of travels and it’s mind expanding.

At the age of 70, as cancer ravaged his body, Ramana’s devotees begged him to cure himself. He lovingly replied, “Why are you so attached to this body? Let it go,” he said. “Where can I go? I am here.” “That in which all these worlds seem to exist steadily, that of which all these worlds are a possession, that from which all these worlds arise, that for which all these exist, that by which all these worlds come into existence and that which is indeed all these — that alone is the existing reality. Let us cherish that Self, which is the Reality, in the Heart.” — Sri Ramana Maharshi

It sounds like there is contrast appearing between the story of self and storyless no-self of being. It can feel like two different realities. . . I can totally relate to entering space of just being, with no "me" controlling the narrative. It sooo beautiful. And yes, there can be a deep sense of sadness when that "me" voice returns in the head. . . Yet it is a gift that this awareness is revealed. Most people live their entire life without ever becoming aware of this.

Conflating objective, relative and absolute is a recipe for inner turmoil.