Carl-Richard

My dad has bipolar 1 disorder and I've taken 100-200 µg LSD 4 times, and I'm still fine 5 years later. However, back when I used to abuse weed and compulsively think about philosophy all the time, I slowly turned into this sort of semi-dysfunctional weirdo where I was a bit stuck inside my own mind, but I didn't really have any true symptoms of psychosis. Then I discovered meditation and my mind became silent

@Nak Khid Oxytocin is more accurately called the bonding hormone. It invokes a social form of attachment-based relative love. It doesn't encapsulate all aspects of relative love, like hobbies and food etc.

Who said suffering doesn't exist?

That is because you're subscribing to what is so accurately called "feel-good spirituality". It's a stage green fairy tale. True spirituality is not a joke: you accept death, you accept all fears, you accept all suffering, because it is You.

Try to imagine what is outside the universe, or what atoms are made out of; what existed before the beginning of time, or where you will go after you die. Try to get a sense that this nothingness is always present or atleast inevitable. If fear arises, that means you're on the right track.

Lower stages aren't necessarily "bad". Stage purple is cool

@Nak Khid When you immerse yourself in something and you feel good as a result, that IS what you define as love. I think your main problem isn't that you don't understand what love is: it's that you don't understand what nonduality is. When you follow relative love to its ultimate conclusion, to the point where you see through the distinction between self and other, you break through to Absolute Love. You realize that the love that you only extended to a limited amount of reality is actually an intrinsic part of all of reality, even the parts that you used to hate (death, suffering, injustice).

@WisdomSeeker You're right that Ramana's realization has had a huge impact on primarily spreading the word of enlightenment, but Sadhguru's realization has had a concrete multi-faceted impact (economical, social, environmental etc.), exactly because of his worldy involvement in those things. Even though self-actualization has its dark sides, be careful not to demonize it too much. The path to self-realization is also riddled with delusion and dysfunction. It's all a mixed bag.

I'll try to bridge the conceptual gap between relative love and absolute love by sharing an insight I had some years ago: When you do something you love very much (say your favorite hobby), your immersion and attention towards that thing increases, and it feels very good. That means your experience of that thing is bigger and more in tune with the reality of that thing. You can use neuroscience to back that up: dopamine increases attention, motivation and feelings of pleasure -> increased performance -> more in tune with reality. Then when you REALLY love something, your immersion and attention becomes so intense that the distinction between you and the thing vanishes, and you and the thing are ONE. If you concede that your access to reality is determined by your immersion and attention to that reality, then it logically follows that reality is dependent on LOVE. When you reach these higher states of love where you merge with the thing that you're in love with, then you realize that Love is Absolute. Love IS Reality. Everything is Love.

Thanks. I didn't know that.

@WisdomSeeker You're onto something there. Sadhguru has a level of self-realization, but he also has a deep level of self-actualization. He is involved in many different aspects of worldy affairs, highly resourceful, highly skilled and experienced in many areas. You can argue that Ramana has a deeper level of self-realization, but the sheer impact that Sadhguru has on his environment is on a totally different level. The worldy impact of his self-realization is global and multi-faceted because of his high level of self-actualization. Ken Wilber uses the distinction between "growing up" and "waking up". Western self-help emphasizes the former and eastern the latter. One is associated with materialism and worldy impact, the other is mysticism and spiritual growth. Both are essential for living a fruitful life (and things like "cleaning up": emotional/trauma work etc.). How much you're willing to emphasize each aspect is up to you.

@WisdomSeeker What would you say is the difference between say a person like Sadhguru and Ramana Maharshi?

What I meant to ask is what specific actions are you talking about? What does dissolving the ego have to entail for your actions?

How so?

@WisdomSeeker Yes, you have the choice to be like Ramana Mahararshi and sit in a cave for your entire life, but just know that you have other oppurtunities that can be actualized. Self-realization and self-actualization aren't contradictory concepts: they play in tandem. The former is the knowing of your true nature, and the latter is the manifestation of that knowing in the world. Ramana's quote "your own Self-Realization is the greatest service you can render the world" is meaningless if you don't manifest your realization in the world.

Projection.

If nothing is actualized, there is nothing to be realized.

@Danioover9000 Remember to be extra careful about being conscious enough!

To find yourself you must trust yourself.

Do your practice, and then do whatever you want. Then whatever you're doing will be a high consciousness hobby.

The observer and the observed is a distinction which you're imagining.

Nope

Hmm... would you consider this statement to be a statement of openmindedness?

That is just.. it brings a tear to my eye.

I remember not long ago you said that typing "LMAO" is an indication of sarcasm. Does that apply now?