Science Podcast Appearance Coming Soon

[UnbornTao]

8 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Why not inquire further?

It is far easier to fool someone, than to convince them they have been fooled.

[Natasha Tori Maru]

2 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

It is far easier to fool someone, than to convince them they have been fooled.

I read my own signature again and again through this thread, I am glad it got through you.

[UnbornTao]

Just now, Natasha Tori Maru said:

I read my own signature again and again through this thread, I am glad it got through you.

I love you.

[Natasha Tori Maru]

11 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

I love you.

Jubilantly received 

To be sure, you do not even know what I claim. Your inferences and assumptions are as vague as fumes dissolving in a mirage.

Which is why the fool thing sorta fell flat 🙃

[UnbornTao]

3 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Jubilantly received 

To be sure, you do not even know what I claim. Your inferences and assumptions are as vague as fumes dissolving in a mirage.

Which is why the fool thing sorta fell flat 🙃

I'd like to emphasize the second part of the quote in relation to this discussion: than to convince them they have been fooled.

[Natasha Tori Maru]

It's a good message for you, isn't it? It made the desired impact. 

Good day 😏

[UnbornTao]

4 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

It's a good message for you, isn't it? It made the desired impact. 

Good day 😏

You can keep believing, if you want. 

[Joseph Maynor]

1 minute ago, UnbornTao said:

You can keep believing, if you want. 

What is a belief?  

[UnbornTao]

11 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

What is a belief?  

A thought that is held as true. Or a thought about the truth of something.

"Thought" that can appear as if it were "the way things are". But it is still a thought, an activity (of the mind), and therefore distinct in nature from whatever is the case for itself.

It is thinking taken as true in itself. May need to rephrase this one. 

Edited yesterday at 02:48 AM by UnbornTao

[Joseph Maynor]

1 minute ago, UnbornTao said:

A thought that is held as true. Or a thought about the truth of something.

"Thought" that can appear as "the way things are". But it's a thought, ergo an activity of the mind. And so distinct in nature from whatever's the case for itself.

Which is kinda of the Neo-Advaita focus on the idea that -- thought is false or misleading.

[UnbornTao]

20 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

Which is kinda of the Neo-Advaita focus on the idea that -- thought is false or misleading.

We could even say that this system is itself a belief structure: a set of thoughts strung together that is assumed or taken to be true once adopted (believed).

Hmm, maybe. Perhaps it'd be more accurate to say that they are different from, or independent of, the truth itself - whatever that turns out to be.

Edited yesterday at 03:06 AM by UnbornTao

[Joseph Maynor]

10 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

We could say that this system is itself a belief structure: a set of thoughts strung together that is assumed or taken to be true once adopted. 

Hmm, maybe. Perhaps it'd be more accurate to say that they are different from, or independent of, the truth itself - whatever that turns out to be.

Ok, so we can deconstruct, but when are we allowed to re-construct?

[UnbornTao]

1 minute ago, Joseph Maynor said:

Ok, so we can deconstruct, but when are we allowed to re-construct?

What do you mean? 

The truth only cares about itself, so to speak. So what are you asking? Re-construct what? 

[BlessedLion]

I've been off the forum a while, part of the reason i left is because if you really stay aware you'll see that 95% of the stuff here is the same arguments and debates repackaged and rewrapped over and over and over again. I could lay them out but I don't have the time. I happened to randomly check back in and saw this conversation about Ralston and Leo. 

This one about Ralston and Universal Love and Leo and "who gets it" is as old as the forum itself.

Here's the thing, if any of you were actually conscious of universal love this wouldn't even be a debate, you wouldn't even care about what Ralston or Leo had to say about it. It'd be like me holding an apple in your face you taking a bite then me saying, "alright you didn't bite that apple, prove me wrong!" or "Leo thinks there is no apple there, so you didn't just taste the apple" or "Ralston says that was an orange..." 

 

You would chuckle because you have direct experience of the apple in your mouth so if Leo and Ralston are arguing or disagreeing about it, you wouldn't give 2 fucks. 

 

Here is the thing: Most people do not understand Ralston and what he is doing , his teaching style, and what he is actually getting at. It's probably the most distilled and pure form of consciousness work and contemplation for direct experience that exists. Without drug use by the way. Is it possible that he is missing some things? Sure, he will even admit that actually. 

But thinking you understand him, what he's doing, where he is coming from, what he knows or doesn't know is unwise.... very unwise. He is the only teacher i've found who truly understands mind and consciousness in a direct, experiential way and can help you to get it in your day to day experience, no drugs, no belief systems, complete reliance on his consciousness and that alone. This is why he never preaches things like "Universal Love" or "Infinity" because the moment you start claiming these things, people latch onto them like a baby to a tit and make it a belief system. But he helps you to get there yourself, through doing the work yourself, which is hard, takes forever, is grueling, and painful, and people don't want that- they're too lazy, so people want someone like a Leo or Eckhart Tolle to just tell them everything is Love, they are a special snowflake and will reincarnate as an Egyptian King in their next life. Then they can adopt the belief system and it helps pacify their existential dread. 

 

It's helpful to question this notion of Love, I won't say my take on it, but it's good to question it. What actually is it? Is it a feeling? Is it something deeper? Why is it so brutal? Can there be other words or experiences to describe it? Is it equal to Hate or does Hate exist outside of this Love? 


And you have to discern between dropping beliefs and gaining direct experience, all this podcast thing about him and Leo discussing Universal Love is basically just people wanting their belief systems validated. 

 

Also, I'm not trying to slam Leo or anything, I think Leo has genuinely done incredible work, I just think teaching consciousness work is very tricky and belief systems can be created without the teachers intent. But I also have to say, encouraging drug use is not wise or neccessary, why do you need drugs to uncover and become conscious of what you are, it's you! People always want the easy pill but it never works. A true teacher can get people there in their sober day to day life. 

 

P.s. I've met Ralston in person and went deep with him on this question of Universal Love, his answer was very nuanced and careful, but also quite beautiful. 

 

[BlessedLion]

 

[Natasha Tori Maru]

@BlessedLion ❤️

[Davino]

23 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

I bet you went through the motions, watching the Adi Da video and hearing the words, but did you really make an attempt to hear it?

I love Adi Da, for me he's one of the greatest, I have two pictures of him and have part of his art as wallpaper in my phone. I've watched countless of videos of him, meditated with his darshans and I'm reading the Aletheon. It's just a matter of fact that none of the people who lived with him on the island have become incredibly Awake beings and teachers that have continued their tradition, the apparition of such beings is like a shooting star. I understand Adi Da and also see why it's so hard to make the bridge towards his state of realisation.

Listen what Adi Da says: Let there be... Bliss Aware... Consciousness itself...

[Davino]

21 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

Oh, it has a foundation, it's just difficult to pinpoint. Perhaps it's like assessing the ability of two actors - one world-class, the other mediocre at best. The problem is that in spiritual circles, a charlatan can be made to appear as if they know what they're talking about. Put an Indian guy with a guru name and long beard on a pedestal, wearing a robe and talking about God, Awakening, Samadhi and so on, and most of you will just buy it, not knowing the difference. Look at @Davino and his reading of someone like Brendan, versus some of the Indian guys whose videos he's shared, which are essentially selling spiritual fantasies. It goes over one's head how much there is to developing one's listening capacity.

Few people understand Nithyananda, once see superficially, others dislike their Hindu style and the rest fall on the fake news but then think they wouldn't have crucified Christ on their time, it's okay, I've gotten through it. On the other hand, you haven't tried any of his techniques, you haven't tried his 108 asana (I've done them sober and on LSD), or his 308 asanas, or his unclutching meditations, or his oneness capsules (life transforming), or his live two-way initiations (I've experienced kundalini Awakenings, powers, healing, samadhis, ecstasy for days, exotic states of consciousness, baseline consciousness increases, herbs that have enhanced my life, etc.)

 

It's funny cause you think I talk on my ass but I sit on immense research and practice every time I talk. I'm a fucking spiritual weirdo fanatic. You have no clue of my level of commitment, dedication and sacrifice I have for this work.

Quote

Adi Da, for example, was leagues ahead of Leo. This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. And it's not a put-down of Leo; it's just the case. 

Base line most probably.

Peak not even joking.

Edited 13 hours ago by Davino