Purging Bullshitters

[Leo Gura]

12 hours ago, Annoynymous said:

@Leo Gura would you ban a racist in this process? I think you should because i have seen racist in your Society forum. Don't you think that's toxic too?

We have banned racists in the past.

If we see clear racists posts we will definitely take action on them. Point them out to us. It has to be a clear example of racism though. Keep in mind that most people have a bit of racist in them.

[Derek White]

@Leo Gura How do you plan to deal with the gender wars happening in the relationships sub?

The arguments are endless, they are not there to learn.

[supremeyingyang]

@Leo Gura

Fair enough.

If I understand you good you ban radicals who believe in race superiority (and of course their race is best)

Edited February 4, 2020 by supremeyingyang

[Leo Gura]

8 minutes ago, Derek White said:

@Leo Gura How do you plan to deal with the gender wars happening in the relationships sub?

The arguments are endless, they are not there to learn.

Yes, it's a problem.

I have spoken out against it and will continue to do so.

I also try to lock down such threads after a while.

But to some extent is has to be allowed to play itself out. People are where they're at. Most people see the world through the POV and self-biases of their gender and refuse to see it from the other side. This requires a Tier 2 meta perspective which many people here lack and I certainly can't beat it into you.

[Lento]

@Bill W

I hear you, and I'm not trying to defend my perspective just because I want to defend it (that'd make me a hypocrite). I actually think it's very valid.

@Preety_India

Thank you so much. I appreciate your sweet comment and insightful response ???

Here are some points I like to consider;

• I've experienced it first hand that being on the opposite side of victim/closed-minded and trying to help those who are stuck/struggling have a great effect on my growth, especially on my communication skills and emotional development. I think that playing the role of the teacher is vital for certain aspects of our development. If Leo's past that now, then not everyone is.
• It's not just about avoiding victim mindsets/closed-mindedness. The responses from the members and moderators very often have been very much insightful, and on a variety of levels. The responses don't only help the recipient, they help everyone. I just can't say no to a deep insight! This also can very well enhance our ability to deal with such people in real life and on other platforms as well. This is a skill that we (at least me) are trying to master.
• I have a hypothesis. In every community there's going to be all kinds of people no matter how hard you try to eliminate them. I think this place is well balanced already. I don't see what's the point in shifting that balance towards something else that may turn toxic at some point. This point may not be really relevant though. Maybe it would be better to have less of those people, but I already rarely encounter any of them and I believe that if our attention is given to them, then it's a natural part of development. I don't know why would we call it a distraction?! I think everyone is wise enough to determine what a distraction is for themselves. I certainly don't need Leo to tell me what posts are hindering or advancing my personal growth because nobody has knowledge over that, not even me. I just believe in the principle of not rejecting any perspective, no matter how naive it might seem. Besides, this is just an online forum. I don't see any real threats or dangers from those who are accused of being 'backwards'. I think as long as they're not actually harming anyone in any way, whether intentionally or not, and as long as they're not offensive, then I don't see the problem. If you don't like them, just ignore them. I personally don't like some members and moderators. I simply ignore what I don't like. Just basic Law of Attraction!

Edited February 4, 2020 by Lento

[Lento]

2 hours ago, Serotoninluv said:

Just to re-iterate, it's more about orientation and intention than level of development.

I think the intention is not something accessible to anyone outside of the person themselves. While I believe the level of development kind of goes hand in hand with the orientation, the intention remains something else entirely. You just can't know my intentions, just as much as I can't know yours. We can assess each other's levels of development, personality types, etc... But let's not forget our own biases. In my experience, every time I assume someone is intending something, it's probably something in my shadow that I need to revisit. It doesn't necessarily have to be in them at all. It may be just me, and may not be. I can't know their intentions until they say it loud and clear. For all I know, there's a lot that I don't know, and they might have some special knowledge or experience that I have no idea of yet.

2 hours ago, Serotoninluv said:

Yet that's different than someone with the orientation/intention of pushing a religious agenda - for example: that god hates so-and-so and the so-and-so people will burn in hell. This person is hurting, yet if their orientation/intention is solely an agenda to push religious ideology and their behavior doesn't change after repeated warnings and attempts to open space for growth, then the forum isn't doing them any good at a personal level and it can become toxic at the community level. 

I so much disagree with this. That perspective can be viewed somewhat as a religious belief. So much like "my perspective is the best perspective". Wanting the community to behave in certain ways and not some other way (just unwanted, not actually unhealthy) I think is limiting to the community as a whole and to us as individuals. Besides, regarding what the "religious fundamentals" are spreading around here; I think there's a lot of truth in it. And in fact, spirituality itself can be seen as a branch of religion, although many may view it superior to religion, but it cannot exist solely without religion, just like a tree cannot exist solely without the land. The point is; let's not demonise religion. There's a lot of wisdom in everything. And everyone shall find what they're looking for.

Edited February 4, 2020 by Lento

[Forestluv]

2 hours ago, Lento said:

let's not demonise religion. There's a lot of wisdom in everything. And everyone shall find what they're looking for.

I didn't say to demonize religion. Of course there is a lot of wisdom in everything, including religion. That is the whole point. Seeing that there is wisdom in everything is non-ideological. If someone was pushing an agenda of anti-religious / atheist dogmatic ideology - that also would not be tolerated on the forum. 

As well, the phrase "and everyone shall find what they're looking for." is consistent with the theme of a non-dogmatic forum. If someone said "Religion resonates with me, personally. I'm looking to deepen and expand my religious understanding. Can someone give me some suggestions?". That orientation is totally fine. Perhaps they would get suggestions about ACIM, Neal Donald Walsch, the sermon on the mount etc. This is fine. It is not the problematic orientation. A clear dogmatic orientation would be something like a person coming to the forum and calling LGBTQ members sinners that will burn in hell and push dogmatic religious conversion therapy on them. That orientation would be inappropriate on the forum. 

This is welcomed on the forum. No one gets warnings or banned for sharing wisdom or seeking their personal development. 

2 hours ago, Lento said:

So much like my perspective is the best perspective. Wanting the community to behave in certain ways and not some other (just unwanted, not actually unhealthy) I think is limiting to the community as a whole and to us as individuals. 

You may be referring to grey areas. Consider degree. For example, there was a previous user that kept posting horrific graphic images of human torture, suffering and death. And his writings were equally gruesome. He framed it as "freedom through death" as a way to fly under the radar. Should we say that all perspectives have value and should we allow the graphic imagery and writings that promote human torture, death and suicide? Would moderating this behavior be "wanting the person to behave a certain way and not some other"? I think most people on the forum would want some standard of behavior.

2 hours ago, Lento said:

I think that the intention is not something accessible for anyone outside of the person themselves. 

This is a nuanced issue. There are extremes and grey areas. Intention and impact can be straight-forward or difficult to determine.

As you say, some cases are hard to tell intent, others not so much. The user posting horrific graphic torture images wrote that he wanted to promote nonduality through the acceptance of human torture and to promote ultimate freedom through physical death and suicide. I think most people would agree this is clear intent. . . . Yet as you say, there are cases in which it is not easy to determine intent and cases in which intent cannot be determined. . . However, there are times that impact supersedes intent. What if the above user said his intent was good and that he was posting horrific images of human torture and death to help people? In this case, impact supersedes whatever intent he claims and he won't be allowed to post it. 

The current spiritual atmosphere we enjoy on the forum isn't the natural default state of online forums . If this forum wasn't moderated it would devolve into a mess of namecalling, trolling, scammers, spammers etc. A lot of people would get sick of it and leave the forum to find another spiritual community. . . The moderators here put in a lot of work to allow for an atmosphere conducive to personal development and spiritual growth. It's easy to say that every comment has value and everyone should be allowed to express whatever they want when the forum is moderated. It's very different in an un-moderated forum filled with trolls, scammers, ideological dogma and people threatening each other. Check out unmoderated anything goes forums - nasty stuff. 

It's not a black or white issue. It is a nuanced spectrum of degrees. There are grey areas. The extreme stuff is easy to moderate. It is the grey area stuff which is hard to moderate. 

[SOUL]

I'm not doing the 'work' because decades ago I have awakened to the realization there is nothing to do, no work, no accomplishment to achieve and no truth to attain. Working to have no ego is like trying to ban your own self from the forum of your own being which attempting to do often is just fodder for more self suffering.

Liberation is presence of being in the moment free of self suffering....everything else is story telling so just tell a joyful story if one must tell one.

[Raptorsin7]

@SOUL What does that feel like? Not doing the work.

[SOUL]

@Raptorsin7  There are many facets including peace, joy, fulfillment but if it could be said in a word......Bliss.

[Raptorsin7]

@SOUL Dam sweet. I felt myself as god but now i'm disconnected. I could really go for some bliss right now lol

[Derek White]

@SOUL “(If you doubt enlightenment this forum isn't for you.)” - User Guidelines 

[Raptorsin7]

@Derek White enlightenment is a state of being. Once you get there, there's nothing else to do but play. I think this guy is in the play mode now.

[SOUL]

@Raptorsin7  Yea, one of the other facets of 'feeling' could be described as unattached connectedness.... connected to all without being attached to any.

[SOUL]

@Derek White What do you consider 'enlightenment' to be?

[SOUL]

@Raptorsin7 The other day I had a clear description of the feeling that could be easily understood even by someone unawakened. You know that euphoric feeling of getting something you desperately want whether it be something material or a circumstance? Just feeling that way for no reason whatsoever....just because.... and the mind may be searching for the reason but there isn't one. It just is.

[Raptorsin7]

@SOUL The feeling just is. People will have no conception unless they experience it. It was the kinda thing where once I felt it I knew it and everything made sense. But prior to that feeling, you couldn't describe it to me no description could map onto what I felt.

[Leo Gura]

36 minutes ago, SOUL said:

I'm not doing the 'work' because decades ago I have awakened to the realization there is nothing to do, no work, no accomplishment to achieve and no truth to attain. Working to have no ego is like trying to ban your own self from the forum of your own being which attempting to do often is just fodder for more self suffering.

Liberation is presence of being in the moment free of self suffering....everything else is story telling so just tell a joyful story if one must tell one.

That's is a half-truth.

In a sense it's right. But in another sense it's deeply problematic to hold this view.

I don't care how awake you may be, you've got more work to do, more things to become conscious of. If you're not here to do inner work, then you have no reason to be here at all. And feeding newbies the idea that they have no inner work to do leads them down a cul de sac of inaction, laziness, and apathy.

The ego would love nothing more than to believe it needs to do no work.

After you've done a ton of work, then you can talk about how you don't need to do work.

It's like a billionaire talking about how work is unnecessary. Yes, for him it's unnecessary because he's already done enough to live off the interest. But this is not appropriate advice for people who struggle to pay for food.

[Forestluv]

54 minutes ago, SOUL said:

Liberation is presence of being in the moment free of self suffering....

That is conditional. There is more.  Absolute Liberation is unconditional. 

[SOUL]

4 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

That's is a half-truth.

In a sense it's right. But in another sense it's deeply problematic to hold this view.

I don't care how awake you may be, you've got more work to do, more things to become conscious of. If you're not here to do inner work, then you have no reason to be here at all. And feeing newbies the idea that they have no inner work to do leads them down a cul de sca of inaction, laziness, and apathy.

The ego would love nothing more than to believe it needs to do no work.

This is why you're still on the path....you believe there's work to do. The ego wants you to work because it needs to justify itself through it. I lived that working path for years until one day I just ceased struggling and the self suffering ceased along with it.

Sure the ego mind continued to entice and cajole me into struggling with it, it pushed all the buttons it had at it's disposal to instigate a reaction to it....and there were times I fell back into the struggle only to recognize the self suffering came back with that.

Some, well, many, yes even all may need to go through a process of healing before they can be sufficiently aware of the suffering that is being generated through the struggle with the self but the ego mind will continue to stir up reasons to react to it and cause more suffering.

As long as we are alive in the body it has urges and desires that the ego mind will use to lure us back into the struggle..... we're not just hungry so need nourishment.... we have to eat a certain food to be 'satisfied'. Our lives have to be arranged just a certain way for us to be 'happy'.

Instead in liberation no matter the circumstances or situations I live in well being... it's like you alluded to in one of your videos that you were chided for by some guy.... I could be confined to a box and be in well being.... well, paraphrased.

Why am I still here? You are aware of what a bodhisattva is, right? I remain in the manifest to let others know that liberation exists and they can also experience the cessation of self suffering. So this forum can serve as a way to express this to others.

Will you ban me for this?