Seek and ye shall find. That's the whole trick.

[Joshe]

19 hours ago, LambdaDelta said:

Nobody's disputing that at the end of the day all the truth-seeking and awakening is a preference/bias/hobby,

Leo disagrees. 

But I agree with you. 

[Natasha Tori Maru]

@Joshe

Quote

Love wasn't even in your vocabulary until Leo introduced it to you. 

Love as a concept metaphysically has been around longer than philosophy, even. It is not originating from Leo.

Vedanta, Daoism, Confusian ren, ancient Greece, Christianity, Jewish Kabbalah, modern philosophy etc etc etc 

I could go on... 

[LambdaDelta]

9 hours ago, Joshe said:

Have you ever analyzed what a realization is and how they come into existence? 

If you analyze the chain of events and the relevant accumulations/iterations that involve a realization, you can (or at least I can) see the primary links of the chain that led to it. Even if you fail to see the chain, the chain is there. If you analyze those chains, you'll realize the realizations are never "discovered" - they're generated. 

A few questions: 

1. Has this idea ever crossed your mind? 

2. How does one distinguish "I found what was always there" from "consciousness rendered what I aimed at"? 

3. If it turned out that your 40+ realizations were generated rather than discovered, how would that impact you? 

Yes, and I 'realized' that they don't come into existence at all, they already exist, as does everything else. Anything 'new' (insight, life, action...) is an imagined distinction. There's no need for me to deny the chains — some I see, others I don't. #2: You make it sound as though the second option is somehow inferior because it implicitly strips you of agency or is illusory. A meaningless distinction. I (Consciousness) was always there, imagined forgetting what I am, plus the entire chain of events leading to an eventual rediscovery of the source. The two options seamlessly blend into a strange loop. Naive solipsistic idealism that doesn't incorporate Will and other important factors would indeed fail at eluding your mechanism, but this very mechanism is an indispensable part of the engine of reality; it works regardless of whether you're aware of or accept it or not, and it works with perfect precision and beauty. Try escaping it if you like, to a certain degree that's healthy skepticism, but ideally that would culminate in realizing that escaping it is impossible nor is there a need to, as you are the mechanism that has designed itself and all escape attempts. Thus, #3 becomes a moot point, since the difference between 'discovered' and 'generated' was itself generated (imagined), which doesn't bother me in the slightest. At any given moment I know and don't know as much as I need to, neither more nor less. All that's ever happening is light bouncing around at different angles within the fractal mirror of Mind ('happening', 'light', 'bouncing', 'different', 'angles', etc. are of course imaginary both as terms/concepts and the 'actual' things those words are pointing at). 

 

10 hours ago, Joshe said:

Maybe you guys should rewatch the video and see if you're applying your principles consistently.

Under the definition I previously gave and considering what's said above in this post, yes. You see, all of my wrongness, hypocrisy, and egotism are totally consistent with the trajectory Consciousness has set for me, and they'll be corrected (or not) when the time comes. Don't take this as avoidance of responsibility, I'm doing the best I can, as is everyone. 

 

10 hours ago, Joshe said:

Lastly, this pattern of assuming I need to be educated on basic shit is annoying and arrogant. The video you pointed me to is so basic I couldn't make it past 15 mins. I figured that stuff out in my 20s through simple observation of reality.

Unlike you, I rewatched the video in full. Maybe what's actually arrogant is going through 8% of the runtime and assuming the rest will just be the same since the introduction is already familiar to you. Imagine dropping a university class or some online course you bought because the instructor dedicated the first few lectures to reviewing and solidifying the priors/fundamentals. Without even going through 1/10th of the material, you presume to know it all. No wonder there are blind spots even in this simple framework you presented in this thread, let alone understanding of reality as a whole. Doesn't matter how potent your observation ability is, it's not enough; you still need talking heads, books, other perspectives, and much more, which can then be filtered and synthesized. Perhaps if you bothered to watch the full 3 hours you'd find many of your objections addressed. 

 

11 hours ago, Joshe said:

The difference is I didn’t merge my knowledge with my identity. 

Consider that you should. But also consider the nuances of that as to not dig yourself into a deeper hole. 

[LambdaDelta]

11 hours ago, Joshe said:

Leo disagrees.

Not really. Only when his job requires it. Just like a math teacher insists on the importance of learning math, or your parents on getting a good career or whatever. If they instead said that it's all a meaningless hobby and being an uneducated homeless drug addict is no better or worse, you can see how most people would choose to behave. But he explicitly stated that's it all a bias on several occasions. 

[Joshe]

4 hours ago, LambdaDelta said:

#2: You make it sound as though the second option is somehow inferior because it implicitly strips you of agency or is illusory. A meaningless distinction.

On the contrary, it's not inferior at all. I never thought it was, never said it was, and never implied that it was. 

Of course it's convenient to call it a meaningless distinction, because if you look at it closely, your 40+ realizations will be reduced to a hobby, no more significant than a grandma knitting a quilt. 

You guys think you're climbing to the heavens but you're climbing a horizontal ladder laid in the grass. I'm not knocking that, just like I wouldn't knock a grandma for knitting a quilt. What I'm knocking is the ego game and hierarchy this community is blind to. 

People think they're chasing after "Truth" because it's their "top value". But as said from the outset: for those most entrenched in this community, this is a cope that allows you to exist on a higher plane relative to everyone else. That higher plane is what you really want, not truth. It's nowhere near as simple as you "just want to know what is true".

If I were a true actualized member, I'd say something like: if you haven't realized this obvious self-deception yet, I feel sorry for you and I hope that one day you will be able to see the truth, because right now, you're lost in ego games and time is running out for you. Stop acting like you're too cool for school and go watch the ripping the fuck out of your ego series. 

But I don't talk like that because it's demeaning and I don't have a need to put myself above others. 

Setting that aside, either the hierarchy is based on something real or it's an ego game. One of us is wrong. 

This entire community unconsciously assumes "absolute this or that" is discovered rather than generated. If I am right, this would obviously be one of the MOST significant distinctions this community could make. But of course it would collapse the hierarchy, so it won't happen. 

[Joshe]

5 hours ago, LambdaDelta said:

Not really. Only when his job requires it. Just like a math teacher insists on the importance of learning math, or your parents on getting a good career or whatever. If they instead said that it's all a meaningless hobby and being an uneducated homeless drug addict is no better or worse, you can see how most people would choose to behave. But he explicitly stated that's it all a bias on several occasions. 

Hmm, let's check: 

"One of my 4-hour long videos is worth 2 years of academic study."

"You will understand reality deeper than 99.99999999% of anyone who has ever walked the Earth."

"I am literally offering people Immortality."

"My work is better than science."

"Okay, idiot. Have it your way."

"You are a fool."

These are just a few receipts from his recent blog posts. Does this sound like someone treating their spiritual project like a mere preference? If you think yes, you really do need to dive into bias 101.

This is someone who believes he's offering Immortality, understands reality deeper than virtually every human who ever lived, and calls people idiots and fools on the regular for not seeing it. 

If you can't tell after all these years that these and thousands more receipts add up to something far more than "benevolent teacher", I'm genuinely at a loss.

For the record, I don't dislike Leo - we're all just humans and I have my own faults - but I'd rather see clearly than protect an ego. 

P.S - I know he has provided you with a spiritual justification for his arrogance and so that's where your mind will likely want to wander, but that's just more cope. 

[Joshe]

@Natasha Tori Maru Yes, I'm aware. LambdaDelta said it wasn't in his vocab. 

 

[Natasha Tori Maru]

Everyone knows what Love is. 

You know it as a child. It is the first knowing. Love. Unity. Which is infinity.

You just forget this when you inherit all your bullshit human conditioning.

It is simply a Returning.

[LambdaDelta]

52 minutes ago, Joshe said:

These are just a few receipts from his recent blog posts. Does this sound like someone treating their spiritual project like a mere preference? If you think yes, you really do need to dive into bias 101.

Nobody treats their projects as a mere preference, whether it's Hitler, Leo, or a kid at a science fair. Bias is so profound it's a matter of life and death & beyond, some biases you couldn't drop even with a gun to your head. 
But what do you care how he treats it? Take what's of value, filter the rest. 
It's not like I can't or don't openly criticize Leo. 
For example: https://www.actualized.org/insights/actualized-quotes-381 — pure smug, blindly self-indulgent post, while having a conversation on a science podcast pending to release any day. #382 is also repetitive waste, that time would be better spent on completing the Deconstructing Rationality series. As you said, we're all just humans with faults. 
Or this whole reply I gave in another thread: 
https://www.actualized.org/forum/topic/112839-leo-cant-fix-you-because-you-are-neurodivergent/?do=findComment&comment=1731704

I see him clear enough, and I also see that the criticism and really any activity on this forum is distraction/entertainment. But I like it, so here I am. Maybe another day something will change and I won't be. Call it cope if you like. There is such a thing as Cope as an absolute, so you're not even wrong about that. 

By the way, you're sneaking in subtle language such as 'mere' or 'benevolent'. I didn't say that. 

 

Edited 10 hours ago by LambdaDelta

[Joshe]

43 minutes ago, LambdaDelta said:

By the way, you're sneaking in subtle language such as 'mere' or 'benevolent'. I didn't say that. 

Good catch, my bad. Enjoyed the back and forth and always interested in your perspective. 

[Joshe]

1 hour ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Everyone knows what Love is. 

You know it as a child. It is the first knowing. Love. Unity. Which is infinity.

You just forget this when you inherit all your bullshit human conditioning.

It is simply a Returning.

You've successfully baited me! 

If you have zero recollection of this original knowing, how could you ever verify that you're "returning" to it rather than constructing something new and labeling it as a return?

We don't have to go down this road, lol. I've got shit to do.

Edit:@Natasha Tori Maru Sorry, I didn't mean to sound dismissive. I'm just burned out from work and everything. I shall return.

Edited 9 hours ago by Joshe

[AtmanIsBrahman]

I think the key to this thread is that there is no difference between creating and discovering. If reality is one mind, and you are it, creation and discovery are the same thing.

I think you’re getting at the problem of self deception and specifically confirmation bias. Of course you could always be deluding yourself, but trying to relativize everything doesn’t help either. You’re basically saying that every perspective is equal in a postmodernist sense.

Do you believe there is no absolute truth? And if so, is that itself an absolute truth claim?

@Joshe

[LambdaDelta]

3 hours ago, Joshe said:

Of course it's convenient to call it a meaningless distinction, because if you look at it closely, your 40+ realizations will be reduced to a hobby, no more significant than a grandma knitting a quilt. 

That is exactly what they are. You conveniently skipped over this section of the reply from a previous page:
"Bottomless delusion is the point, that's the whole structure of reality. Truth is the mechanism of delusion (short ver.: Truth is delusion). Truth being too sacred to deconstruct is a projection, if it's true it will withstand all deconstruction. And it will, because there's nothing there to deconstruct. See if you can deconstruct that."

It's not a hierarchy of significance or superiority, if there is any hierarchy it's that of awareness. The grandma is also God experiencing itself, she just doesn't know it and that's okay. She is our ontological equal, therefore I take this comparison as flattering. 
 

3 hours ago, Joshe said:

What I'm knocking is the ego game and hierarchy this community is blind to.

And I'm telling you this won't work. Many are blind to it, no doubt. But some may not be blind at all, they're simply too deep into their delusion and narcissism, by conscious choice. Truth is exactly what you want. Leo's statement "Truth doesn't care about what you want" only directly contradicts this to those who are dissociated from Truth. If you could persuade someone in possession of truth of the falsity of their view, that would automatically make it false. Think about that. Truth is entirely self-evident, this whole discussion is just a game of projection of Q.E.D.'s between two mirrors, exactly as per spec. 
I'm sure I sound incoherent in places. Well, that's because I can effortlessly switch between speaking as a human and as God. Or maybe I actually am incoherent and psychotic. That's up for interpretation. 
 

3 hours ago, Joshe said:

This entire community unconsciously assumes "absolute this or that" is discovered rather than generated.

To be discovered, something first needs to be generated, that is plainly obvious. 
 

8 minutes ago, Joshe said:

Enjoyed the back and forth and always interested in your perspective. 

Same here, cheers. 

[Natasha Tori Maru]

1 hour ago, Joshe said:

You've successfully baited me! 

If you have zero recollection of this original knowing, how could you ever verify that you're "returning" to it rather than constructing something new and labeling it as a return?

We don't have to go down this road, lol. I've got shit to do.

Edit:@Natasha Tori Maru Sorry, I didn't mean to sound dismissive. I'm just burned out from work and everything. I shall return.

The answer can only be discovered for ourselves, unfortunately. 

Which is why there are issues such as these (which you raise) with truth seeking. Telling the truth and subsequent adoption of hearsay. 

[Natasha Tori Maru]

4 hours ago, Joshe said:

This entire community unconsciously assumes "absolute this or that" is discovered rather than generated. 

This is a belief of yours. 

I call it so because you have no concrete evidence to claim the whole community is unconscious of this. Even this dialogue, where users can see what you point at, proves otherwise! 

Wiser words would be 'there are large groups of members of this community who .......'

You tend toward black and white thinking, I have seen. Assumptions and inferences do that.

Edited 7 hours ago by Natasha Tori Maru

[Natasha Tori Maru]

Your OP simply is not describing spirituality. 

It is describing something else.

You have to throw away everything. The seeking. All of it. Spirituality. Truth. Else it becomes another ground.

/End thread 

Edited 6 hours ago by Natasha Tori Maru

[UnbornTao]

It is also the case that truth, as a pursuit, is most likely a fantasy for most people, if they even think to care about it in the first place. It's "the Truth," ohhhh - the promise of a better experience, some adopted belief they're looking to verify, or something along those lines. A crucial point is that it's already assumed to be known, and this huge assumption is precisely what fuels the search from the start. It's a form of bias with a "spiritual" twist. It's like saying: "I'm going to validate this hearsay." In my experience, people do not tell the truth.

This image explains the sentiment better:

Edited 6 hours ago by UnbornTao

[LambdaDelta]

1 hour ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Wiser words would be 'there are large groups of members of this community who .......'

You tend toward black and white thinking, I have seen. Assumptions and inferences do that.

[Natasha Tori Maru]

49 minutes ago, LambdaDelta said:

Exactly 😈

Always what we claim is something others do, as a judgement/denial, is usually precisely what we also do, unconsciously and unclaimed, within ourselves. 

Edited 5 hours ago by Natasha Tori Maru

[Joshe]

5 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Your OP simply is not describing spirituality. 

It is describing something else.

It's called consciousness. You should look into it sometime. 😝

IDK if you know it or not, but you operate from a fixed definition of spirituality.

I think what you call spirituality is "spiritual religion". What I call spirituality is consciousness itself. "Spirituality" is to be in "spirit" - to be aware in consciousness. There are all sorts of "spiritual practices" you can do while in "spirit". 

My entire position was constructed by being very aware while in consciousness. The process of forming the position was spiritual. But I don't practice spiritual religion, as of yet. 

One could argue that my OP, which examines how consciousness generates experiences, is more spiritual than you memorizing "love is the first knowing", lol.

5 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Wiser words would be 'there are large groups of members of this community who .......'

You tend toward black and white thinking, I have seen. Assumptions and inferences do that.

Do you know how ignorant I'd have to be to think it is literally the "entire" community? If this is the best critique you got, I don't think you're engaging seriously.