Forestluv

♥️ ?

@Shin makes a beautiful point - being over-serious can be unhealthy and impede spiritual progress. There is a lot of silliness and laughter along the spiritual path and it can be helpful to laugh at our own egos at times. @Serotoninluv ? Time for some dancing in my kitchen. . . ?

❤️ ♥️ ?

@tsuki Thank you. Sometimes I add clarity to posts. The posts to you prior to my “Haha ?” were not edited, but someone elses were. . . (I edited this post by adding the below image. Haha ?)

Haha ? I’m not saying you are wrong. I’m saying you are wrong AND right. One needs to let go of one to see the other. Then let go of the other to see both and neither. I am saying you are wrong and right. I am also saying I am wrong and right. The Tao is both wrong and right. Look at the image I attached. I’m cool with agreeing and disagreeing with all of those paradoxical statements. It’s not a thinking thing. It’s nonverbal. Yet we often use words and images to help “see it” Immersion in nature helped me a lot. In some areas, nature is a better teacher than humans.

Nice drawing! I also like the below image. Notice how there is: 1. A young woman 2. An old woman 3. Both an old woman AND a young woman simultaneously. 4. Neither an old woman nor a young wonan simultaneously. 5. Numbers 1-5 above are all true and false simultaneously. If we add them all up. . . Drumroll. . . Everything and Nothing ? Each step gets progressively harder to “see”.

There is a deeper level of opposites.

There is no duality between duality and non-duality AND there is duality between duality and non-duality. There can also be clinging to one end of this paradox.

Very close!

@Paul92 You are creating this meaning and can stop if you want to,

I noticed you post a lot about “good” vs “evil”. You seem to want to have a universal objective definition in a relative context. In the above example, the contrast between the rape (evil) and birh of a baby (good) is a distraction from the underlying issue: you want a universal objective answer to “what is correct”. Yet this is relative. You can create any meaning you want in a relative context. I could say “yes”, “no” or “maybe”. In an absolute context there is abscence of meaning. The above situation would be neither correct nor incorrect.

@Paul92 To me it sounds like you are forcing yourself into a decision you don’t need to make. Illusion = Real. And Real = Illusion. If you get trapped one side and reject the other, that is separation and life can’t get painful.

It is fine to criticize teachers, videos and the forum in a thoughtful manner. Yet please do not engage in click-baiting, profanity, inflammatory posts, namecalling etc.

@FreeThoughtFlow You are unaware how difficult it is to teach to a diverse audience. I’ve never met a teacher who taught to a diverse audience and got 100% positive student evaluations. It would actually be a red flag imo.

I see your point and see value in it. I’d rather not get into a discussion and analysis of raw data sets, statistical quantifications and the conclusions drawn. Based on my experience as a scientist, I’d estimate that would take several hours of work into the weeds of T-tests, Anova, chi square, P-values, levels of confidence etc. Also, discussions about assigning values of “good” and “bad” science and misinformation are very nuanced. Much of science is along continuums, it is not “bad” or “good”. There can be mixtures of “bad” and “good” and different degrees of “bad” and “good”. And there is of course multiple statistical tools that yield different models and interpretations. I can take the same data set and give you a significant result or insignificant result depending on the tool I use. I would not draw your own conclusions regarding the statistical interpretations based on that video. I think these are very interesting conversations and I’ve spent many hours engaged in it. Yet it’s not what I was pointing to and it is a distraction. I’m willing to call the “Dunning-Kruger” effect a model without a consensus regarding statistical significance at this point. This would also be true of 99% of the models discussed in the forum. There is a distinction between a model and statistical significance to suppirt a model. Just because a model lacks statistical significance foes not mean thete is statistical significance to regute that model. Consider Wilbur’s “Pre/Trans” model. I think it’s a useful model - yet there has been no experimentation on it and there is zero statistical support. Why should we hold Dunning-Krugers model to a higher standard than Wilbur’s model? For the purpose of this discussion and the intention of helping the OP, I am fine referring to it as “being unaware of one’s own deficiencies and over-estimating their competencies” as you suggested.

Why not enter a situation with an open mind and create a reccomendation that is best for the situation that arises? With the above attitude, you would miss a lot of situations in which psychedelics would be valuable as part of their path. When I advise people, I don’t think “based on my experience, this path is superior for people” before they even enter my office. I allow them to enter my office and I have an open mind. My intention is to help them find the best path for themself. That may be similiar to my path or different than my path. I listen to them and based on what they say, I may share pieces of my knowledge and experience that may help them along their own path. I don’t try to steer them along a path I think would be best for them.

@okulele Most Turquoise teachers are speaking to green level audiences. They meet their students where they are at and can appear lower. There are a wide variety of Yellow level conversations. Mooji and Einstein would converse differently at yellow, with some overlap

That is all fine and dandy. That’s not what I’m saying at all. Retreating into “there is no me” will prevent you from seeing this. Throughout this thread, FoxFoxFox has been pointing at someone’s somewhere. That is a somewhere when “you” do that. With first experience with nowhere it’s really easy to embrace it, shift into it and reject somewhere. There is retreat to nowhere. This is similiar to embracing nonduality and rejecting duality. Nowhere and somewhere are inter-related. Nondualuty and duality are inter-related. The two are integrated as a whole. You are both nowhere and somewhere, yet trying to embrace nowhere and reject somewhere. There are not opposites. Not duality or nonduality. Not “me” or “not me”. Not absolute or relative. These are all two sides of the same coin. And yes, this message comes from a somewhere. If you focus on that you will miss the essence of the message.

By focusing on my somewhere, you cannot see your somewhere. I have to be somewhere to show you this. The key is to not focus on my somewhere. Everytime someone grounds and points, they are a somewhere. It doesn’t matter what it is. We could be talking about sports or Nonduality. As soon as one makes a point, they are a somewhere. Even me right now trying to point to nowhere is a somewhere. There is nothing wrong with being a somewhere. The problem arises when one loses awareness of their somewhere. Throughout this thread you are somewhere evertime you make a point, as am I. Yet you keep saying you are nowhere when you are somewhere. You are pointing at someone’s somewhere not recognizing your somewhere while doing so.

You keep saying “X is Y” and unaware that “X is X”. You are in relative dimension that you don’t recognize because it appears different from your previous relative dimension that you evolved out of. You are somewhere, yet think you are nowhere.

I was referring to the effect qualitatively, not quantitatively.

@Paul92 To me, it seems like you are going from one opposite to the other. For exampe: “If duality isn’t true, then nonduality must be true” ”If ‘me’ isn’t true, then ‘not me’ must be true” Sometimes a mind becomes so attached to one side that it’s helpful to knock it off that side by showing the other side. If the mind becomes aware of the other side, the mind often becomes attached to the other side. Imagine someone thinks a coin is heads their whole life. What’s the best way to show them the coin isn’t heads? Show them the tails side. But then the person can get attached to the tails side and say “Heads is false! Tails is true!”. But then Heads apoears. So heads must be true and tails false. But then Tails appears again. . , Every time one side appears, the other side disappears. This can cause a lot of confusion and turmoil if a person is not aware they are both the same coin. When heads appears, tails still exists and vice-versa. Similarly, when “me” appears “no me” still exists and vice-versa. “Me” can love and experience life, while “no me” also exists and is present.

You asked in an earlier thread for me to give you another pointer, yet again you don’t seem open to receiving it.

This is my earlier point. From the null void, you are doing the same thing she is. You are pointing yourself to it.

I’ve dine all three. For me, the dosages would be a bit different