Peter Ralston On LOVE - Newsletter Response

[Mellowmarsh]

I understand everything James talks about too. 
 

If I don’t understand something someone talks about, I never hold back or pretend I do , I just outright tell them I don’t know what you are talking about.

[Inliytened1]

12 minutes ago, Mellowmarsh said:

I think people just take away from messages what is of value to them. I can see someone else’s point of view from where they are coming from, or I can’t. Same goes for Leo talks, so far I’ve been able to understand everything that guy talks about. Strangely enough. 
 

 

That's where this work gets so tricky.   Even Leo has gone back and wiped the slate clean at times to ensure he hasn't been self deceived.  I think if someone believes something deep enough they could deceive themselves and then when later interpreting their awakenings something could get misconstrued.  

[Jirh]

The Wikipedia pages for love and truth, if anyone's interested:

Love

Truth

[Mellowmarsh]

3 hours ago, Inliytened1 said:

That's where this work gets so tricky.   Even Leo has gone back and wiped the slate clean at times to ensure he hasn't been self deceived.  I think if someone believes something deep enough they could deceive themselves and then when later interpreting their awakenings something could get misconstrued.  

I think it’s all about understanding yourself and not caring about whether you are understood by others.

Only you are you, and you cannot be another you, nor can another you be you.

However, it’s important to know that any you can only see a reality from the lens of it’s own perception, from the perspective of how it is being revealed to them, and how could they possibly be wrong if what they are perceiving is appearing within them. Is that for anyone else to judge or doubt it’s actual validity? Not really…eh. No one else can disprove another person’s worldview. 

Any you can report to other you’s what they have seen on their mind trips by sharing their unique experiences with them. And why would anyone else invalidate their sharing of themself. We could either align with their point of view as something we have also experienced ourselves or just say wow that’s cool and not deny them their experience. Or tell them they are lying. I mean it’s no one else’s place but theirs anyway.

The point is, I believe we’re all individually each our own little mini universes that are a unique never to be repeated reality, so how one person experiences their reality could never be any different than how it’s appearing to them, and nothing in their personal experience would be wrong. That’s how I look at this, anyway..

 

 

[Joseph Maynor]

4 hours ago, Inliytened1 said:

  Now..what Ralston seems to miss then is that feeling and emotion are part of Infinite Consciousness.  

Yes.  And then we have Intuition which is part of Beauty IMO.  But Truth is the foundation.

[Mellowmarsh]

2 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

Yes.  And then we have Intuition which is part of Beauty IMO.  But Truth is the foundation.

But isn’t the intuition just the unconscious made conscious. It’s the unconscious that’s running the show here,  the noumenal made phenomenal. 

[Joseph Maynor]

43 minutes ago, Mellowmarsh said:

I think it’s all about understanding yourself and not caring about whether you are understood by others.

Only you are you, and you cannot be another you, nor can another you be you.

However, it’s important to know that any you can only see a reality from the lens of it’s own perception, from the perspective of how it is being revealed to them, and how could they possibly be wrong if what they are perceiving is appearing within them. Is that for anyone else to judge or doubt it’s actual validity? Not really…eh. No one else can disprove another person’s worldview. 

Any you can report to other you’s what they have seen on their mind trips by sharing their unique experiences with them. And why would anyone else invalidate their sharing of themself. We could either align with their point of view as something we have also experienced ourselves or just say wow that’s cool and not deny them their experience. Or tell them they are lying. I mean it’s no one else’s place but theirs anyway.

The point is, I believe we’re all individually each our own little mini universes that are a unique never to be repeated reality, so how one person experiences their reality could never be any different than how it’s appearing to them, and nothing in their personal experience would be wrong. That’s how I look at this, anyway..

 

 

I would agree with this take if people who believe this would actually put it into practice.  To me this is a weird conceptual layer almost like a philosophical religion.

[Mellowmarsh]

4 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

I would agree with this take if people who believe this would actually put it into practice.  To me this is a weird conceptual layer almost like a philosophical religion.

I’m not really sure I understand what you mean. Because how can we not be our authentic selves, it’s not a practice, I don’t think anyone practices how to be, they’re just being what they’re being, as far as I understand being.

If someone tells me they visit wormholes in their trips, or dreams, then I’m not going to disbelieve them, if they say they have then they probably have. 

[Joseph Maynor]

49 minutes ago, Mellowmarsh said:

I’m not really sure I understand what you mean. Because how can we not be our authentic selves, it’s not a practice, I don’t think anyone practices how to be, they’re just being what they’re being, as far as I understand being.

If someone tells me they visit wormholes in their trips, or dreams, then I’m not going to disbelieve them, if they say they have then they probably have. 

You seem to be selective when you use and when you omit "you".  It's not consistent.  

[Mellowmarsh]

24 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

You seem to be selective when you use and when you omit "you".  It's not consistent.  

It’s my story, no need to be judgemental. 

Edited 3 hours ago by Mellowmarsh

[Joseph Maynor]

1 hour ago, Mellowmarsh said:

It’s my story, no need to be judgemental. 

I'm trying not to be now.  Have at it.  

[Mellowmarsh]

5 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

I'm trying not to be now.  Have at it.  

No one or thing can try not to be now, or try to be out of the now. 
 

Have you ever tried to be not now, or out of the now? 

[CARDOZZO]

Ralston knows all that I said to him. He really wants that YOU get it.

He is 100% committed to the Truth. He is not a fan of language.

[Breakingthewall]

The matter of love is simple: what we call love is being. As self-preserving (living) entities, we are closed to destruction and open to preservation. What we perceive as preservation, we perceive as connection, being, that is, love. What we perceive as destruction, we do not. This causes our perception to be closed; it's inevitable. If perception is completely open, everything is being, connection, that is, love.

[Mellowmarsh]

I would imagine truth knows without knowing, that goes without saying. 
 

Animals instinctively know what’s good for them that will ensure their survival. Nature has programmed this knowing into them. No language is required for an animal to know what’s good for them, it’s just automatic programming in process. 
 

If Love wasn’t running through every programmed animal including the human animal, then would there even be a will to live anymore. It seems there is a will to live because of the power of Love which is the main driving force of life.

Thats how I personally intuit love.

[Joseph Maynor]

15 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

The matter of love is simple: what we call love is being. As self-preserving (living) entities, we are closed to destruction and open to preservation. What we perceive as preservation, we perceive as connection, being, that is, love. What we perceive as destruction, we do not. This causes our perception to be closed; it's inevitable. If perception is completely open, everything is being, connection, that is, love.

This is not Love.

Edited 1 hour ago by Joseph Maynor

[Breakingthewall]

Just now, Joseph Maynor said:

This is not love.

Yes it is. If you are open to what being is, it's total, everything. More love than the biggest love that you imagined in your wildest dreams 

[Joseph Maynor]

1 minute ago, Breakingthewall said:

Yes it is. If you are open to what being is, it's total, everything. More love than the biggest love that you imagined in your wildest dreams 

This just shows me you don't know what Love is.  This is common.  People who know Truth don't necessarily know Love.

[Breakingthewall]

2 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

This just shows me you don't know what Love is.  This is common.  People who know Truth don't necessarily know Love.

Love is just a word that we use to describe a feeling that we have towards something. The point is that this feeling is just being without the restriction of the negative, the preservation. And this feeling is never absolute, it's always "almost". If you open yourself totally to what you are, that is exactly what you are but without restrictions, it's absolute being , unlimited, and it's absolute love, you will say: alleluia! The fucking prodigal son is again at home

[Mellowmarsh]

Love is Good. Good is Love.

= Truth.