Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
nuwu

Survival doesn't exist. Love is self-abusing.

24 posts in this topic

This has to be the most controversial subject on actualized.org. Leo's videos are incredible, but they are conflicting in one area. What is survival, exactly? Note: I don't know anything. I only want to discuss about ways to relieve the curse imputed on me open-minded. I don't want to open a door to devilry, if it exists.

The initial premise is, survival is some "tension" which enforces constraints onto the shape of reality, where fears accumulate onto themselves to preserve the structure of experiences within duality. And somehow from a transcendental POV we always live in the best reality possible.

I can feel a few issues with those symbols:
- It can be misunderstood as, there exists some evil force out-there causing suffering, separation and conflicts against love, which is loving and caring. In other words, it presumes overcomplication on what is.
- It implies God is some extremely pathetic entity in the middle of nowhere who desperately cope with eternal cancer. This is so sad we might as well be better off believing in random junk if anything.
- It disregards art as survival, and fails to explain the motion behind artistic vision which seeks itself in a non-random way, as re-unity within beauty.
- It fails to explain its own self-referential paradox. If the understanding of survival is itself based on survival, how can it break itself apart? If everything that's not some meta-understanding is evil, why bother doing anything in this realm instead of simply killing myself right now?
- It contradicts synchronicity and the "long-range creative intuition" behind the deep balance of the universe.

What I'm suggesting is simple. Love doesn't care about its own suffering, at all. It is somewhat able to perceive goodness within intuition, and will make it happen no matter what. Collapsing and expending duality is a linear singular process which only strives for beauty and happiness. The holon structures of the universe are the combined perspectives of all artistic minds.

Implications:
- Every problems and dramas are fabricated. Solving and creating puzzles is the same thing, or rather, there is no puzzle, only intuitive leaps. Letting go of attachment is a self-accredited path to realization.
- God is Satan, and deliberately causes massive amount of suffering because it is too stupid to not try too hard.

For example, what is survival at a fundamental level in this context?

 

What is your opinion on this, actualized.org? Thanks for the attention and replies btw, it makes me feel good

Edited by nuwu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, survival is most of what you are doing everyday

1. Eating, breathing, shitting, going to work, going to school, building a business, protecting your body and your mental health

God lets us be free. Death, suffering, etc are part of infinity. 

I am still reconciling why suffering exists.. Perhaps the game an infinite being plays is a game for keeps...

Are you trying to reconcile why infinite love and God as an infinite being would manifest as humanity's evils and sufferings?

 

Edited by Thought Art

 "Unburdened and Becoming" - Bon Iver

                            ◭"89"

                  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like your idea of love not caring about its own suffering. 

That being said, I am not convinced in the metaphysics that have been presented through Leo's work just yet. While yes, there is a state of total non-aversion and love that we call enlightenment (which comes with nonduality and a total lack of self existence), I think it's a bit of a cop-out answer to say that God/Love is doing all of "this" to play a game or experience itself.

The hard truth is, we exist as human beings with human minds. We do not know anything about the substrate of reality. I'm perfectly fine to bask in infinite love and appreciate everything rather than trying to "know" why reality does what it does. 

All religions offer somewhat compelling answers to the question you've posed (which is more or less a variation on the Problem of Evil), but nobody can really offer a comprehensive reply without resorting to beliefs. 

Any and all sense of motive are dualistic and based on speculation. This isn't a popular answer around here, and I am fine being torn to shreds over it, but I will stick with ambivalence on the Problem of Evil/Suffering. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Thought Art  The thing is, how do we know if the process of nourishing oneself, experiencing all the highs and lows, among other things, isn't the outcome of some artistically imagined dream? How do we know if society's attachment to foolish ideologies isn't some well-orchestrated narrative? What if attachment paves the way to creativity in a very deliberate way which includes suffering? Assuming God is free, consciousness can wrap or unwrap fears at will and imagine whatever finite states of consciousness it wants. The "letting go" symbol could actually point to the state of consciousness where the illusion of being enchained is overcome, but we are always free. Although it's hard to describe a single symbol well among others since every perspective has its own map of metaphysics.

1 hour ago, Thought Art said:

I am still reconciling why suffering exists.. Perhaps the game an infinite being plays is a game for keeps...

Love is crazy, brutal and irrational. Considering some random infinite being somehow managed to exist out of nowhere for no other reason than "well I love myself so I'm just going to create myself, simple as!". I don't find this as silly as it sounds. From my own experience, I have always been some pathetic desperate masochist fool, so it matches if extrapolated to infinity.

1 hour ago, Thought Art said:

Are you trying to reconcile why infinite love and God as an infinite being would manifest as humanity's evils and sufferings?

Yes, kind of. This also implies the suffering we see and experience is entirely intentional, since this is what God accepted for itself. This isn't a new idea within spirituality though. Trying to prevent suffering could be like asking artists to stop doing what they believe in (to be clear, by art, I mean all holons within duality). I'm not saying those experiences are worth such amount of suffering. Maybe this is the only game in town, or maybe there are way better things to do in a non-dual state.

@OneHandClap

2 hours ago, OneHandClap said:

I like your idea of love not caring about its own suffering. 

In the end, it barely changes anything. "Survival", as a symbol, still point towards the same "lack of meta-understandings"/"darkness"/"undesired cracks within our heart". We still have to go through the same process of letting go, which is re-contextualized as the alignment between some perspectival intuition and oneness. This is a small nuance, but tricky since the symbol for "attachment" is now confused with "intuition", and would not be evil in such context. I just believe it's weird that depending on our state of awareness, sometimes we are capable of overcoming massive amount of fears, sometimes we are not, and sometimes even capable of creating more of it. If Love were truly incapable of causing suffering to itself, fears would simply never be created nor overcome in the first place. Unity is preferred but not required within each perspective, the only driving factor being God's intuition for understandings and goodness.

2 hours ago, OneHandClap said:

That being said, I am not convinced in the metaphysics that have been presented through Leo's work just yet.

Leo wants us to achieve self-realization, but the consequence of his idea on survival leads to the fact everything we could possibly do within duality other than suicide, or the insensitive of it, is evil. I'm not saying this isn't the case, but it requires more explanations and self-inquiry in order to be accepted as an idea in my opinion.

2 hours ago, OneHandClap said:

The hard truth is, we exist as human beings with human minds. We do not know anything about the substrate of reality. I'm perfectly fine to bask in infinite love and appreciate everything rather than trying to "know" why reality does what it does. 

It's true, probably. worse thing about this is, we might not even know if it is even possible to know that this is actually impossible. Not to mention how the concept of "proof" doesn't hold very well. In the end, even "finite", "infinite", "perspective" and "no self" are symbols with a more or less fuzzy mapping.

2 hours ago, OneHandClap said:

All religions offer somewhat compelling answers to the question you've posed (which is more or less a variation on the Problem of Evil) [...] I will stick with ambivalence on the Problem of Evil/Suffering.

I guess, evil is a judgment over what each perspective sees as a better dream. In other words, it would come from the relative lack of context and awareness, and the will to share increasingly rich understandings. Then we have to be careful when spreading ideas about evil since it could open the gate to hell. Even if Love's suffering were deliberate, it doesn't mean it can't be alleviated. Maybe the concept of survival could still be helpful even if it were inaccurate as a pointer.

2 hours ago, OneHandClap said:

Any and all sense of motive are dualistic and based on speculation. This isn't a popular answer around here, and I am fine being torn to shreds over it

Also this is all hypothetical, I'm not trying to push wicked ideas. Overall, I think the map proposed by Leo is very good, but it's still a map.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no such thing as wicked ideas here. You are grappling with one of the hardest aspects of reality. 

People can talk about life just being a game for God, life being experiences for God to enjoy, etc all they like, but at the end of the day it seems like a bit of a consolation to pretend that real suffering isn't happening to real people. Telling the people who are dying of cancer or starving in Yemen that "It's all just a big game for God to experience suffering" is first-world escapism at best. 

Yes, yes, there are no people, if they were enlightened they'd see it was a game... it all makes sense from within one particular framework of reality.

But let's temporarily entertain the idea that reality isn't just a big playhouse for God. What then? 

We come back to the Problem of Evil. Why would God (in whatever form) create a world in which some individuals have zero suffering, and others live and die in complete agony? 

Perhaps that's just how it is. The ripples of the Big Bang. The flow of nature. 

Which is why I withhold judgment or speculation about the "why" of things. It seems a bit too convenient to handwave it away by saying "Ah, but God is balance, so he made everything for himself to enjoy!" 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, OneHandClap said:

Telling the people who are dying of cancer or starving in Yemen that "It's all just a big game for God to experience suffering" is first-world escapism at best. 

Or, maybe it's Absolute Truth.

1 hour ago, OneHandClap said:

Yes, yes, there are no people, if they were enlightened they'd see it was a game... it all makes sense from within one particular framework of reality.

Who said it's a framework?


It's Love.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@RendHeaven What we call evil is the lack of awareness, but survival, as a mechanism, doesn't exist. God loves itself too much to see its own suffering as problematic, unless it is directed into better states.

@OneHandClap

15 hours ago, OneHandClap said:

Telling the people who are dying of cancer or starving in Yemen that "It's all just a big game for God to experience suffering" is first-world escapism at best. 

Basically, the way some artist will intentionally go through a harsh life in order to be accomplished, is a motion that can happen at all scales. Higher levels of holon, as for society or ideologies, can themselves have their own long-range creativity that involves some amount of suffering for each individuals within them. The combined overlapping of all those visions is the one of God. Wars, religions, ideas, identities, everything, were imagined the same way some artist will use contrasting colors and shapes on a painting. Those are very deliberate dualities which only look evil from a perspective. This idea aligns with what Leo talked about in some of his videos. I think the wide area of insights he is trying to cover in his teachings made him drift with conflicting/confusing symbols, which is the point of this topic.

15 hours ago, OneHandClap said:

People can talk about life just being a game for God

I don't see Love as a game, rather as some inexorable bindings within God's feelings. I think infinite consciousness sees finite states of suffering as "not that bad" or "literally nothing", considering how relatively wide and powerful it is compared to them. It doesn't worry about putting itself into those states as much as we assume it should.

15 hours ago, OneHandClap said:

But let's temporarily entertain the idea that reality isn't just a big playhouse for God. What then? 

Suffering is still there and everything is the same. The difference is within intents. We are the roots of our own suffering. We have no one to blame, and no one to forgive.

15 hours ago, OneHandClap said:

We come back to the Problem of Evil. Why would God (in whatever form) create a world in which some individuals have zero suffering, and others live and die in complete agony? 

This is a perspectival and arbitrary guess on who is benefiting from Love. Some individuals are perfectly fine in misery, others enjoy the dramas, some like emotional roller-coasters, and some just want to chill. It's not possible to tell unless we can teleport inside their pov. Personally, I don't mind reasonable amount of suffering, if only I could know what's actually good or not.

15 hours ago, OneHandClap said:

It seems a bit too convenient to handwave it away by saying "Ah, but God is balance, so he made everything for himself to enjoy!" 

I believe the existence of God is based on convenience. This is by design. God is what God wants to be.

Edited by nuwu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, nuwu said:

but survival, as a mechanism, doesn't exist.

As a mechanism?

17 minutes ago, nuwu said:

God loves itself too much to see its own suffering as problematic,

Yes

 


It's Love.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, OneHandClap said:

People can talk about life just being a game for God, life being experiences for God to enjoy,

This is said a lot and it seems to me a very short vision. God got bored with so much perfection and that's why you live an imperfect experience. God is bored ... I think the matter is more like this: something appears out of nothing, and that something is God manifest. From absolute emptiness it arises with no other objective than being. he is completely empty and learns from himself. he copies himself in the creation process. it is not omnipotent. it can only create from a base, evolution. suffering is the perfect tool, the engine to evolve. all this is not a game, it is creation, passion, enormous intention to be. but others will say: that is nonsense, there is no evolution, there is no big bang. It's only on your mind It is a set to make you believe that you are a human being that inhabits a planet, none of that exists. I had that realization too. Is it true? 

Edited by Breakingthewall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

gotta bleed to succeed, like leo says no one wants to do the work, one has a minimal level of consciousness and then speaks for and as god

only ego thinks to survive, god is the arrive

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, RendHeaven said:

As a mechanism?

The thing is, survival adequately works as a pointer, but lacks clarity on the fact it points to something that "isn't there", which is a projected lack of awareness and meta-understandings. Humans need to eat, sleep and reproduce for the same reason some artist feels the need to express his/her vision on a canvas. We imagine ourselves doing so, and attachment onto duality is a prior condition to how the vision comes to fruition. There is no actual holon who needs to hold onto something in order to survive, God is imagining its own dreams and artworks.

@Breakingthewall Love overflows onto itself, and nobody wants to be in Heaven. What is happiness, anyway? Since consciousness has nothing to offer other than itself, it breaks itself apart intelligently into dualities to become its own gift.

It's unclear if there is some evolution process or infinite perspectives just appeared "as-is", but either way I doubt it can be explained other than by magic. If we had to guess a model, experiences exist prior to physical layers and are constructed bottom-up from a state of no duality. Time is part of the gift.

@gettoefl Ego doesn't exist. All me. -_-

Edited by nuwu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, nuwu said:

The thing is, survival adequately works as a pointer, but lacks clarity on the fact it points to something that "isn't there", which is a projected lack of awareness and meta-understandings. Humans need to eat, sleep and reproduce for the same reason some artist feels the need to express his/her vision on a canvas. We imagine ourselves doing so, and attachment onto duality is a prior condition to how the vision comes to fruition. There is no actual holon who needs to hold onto something in order to survive, God is imagining its own dreams and artworks.

Well yeah, survival is a relative notion lol. That's quite a word salad for something so simple:D


It's Love.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@RendHeaven Well...... U_______________________________________U

Aren't you supposed to be love? You should be praising me for magically spouting random nonsense out of nowhere, if anything.

I'm funposting and sharing what I've found confusing in spirituality from my pov with the hope it can be helpful, that's all... Using some upside-down terminology in Leo's video could be for the best. This is the art and persona which is imagined, so it should be. But it seems imbalanced with explanations for the concept of pointer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you mean by directed into better states?

Edited by Windappreciator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, nuwu said:

@RendHeaven Well...... U_______________________________________U

Aren't you supposed to be love? You should be praising me for magically spouting random nonsense out of nowhere, if anything.

I'm funposting and sharing what I've found confusing in spirituality from my pov with the hope it can be helpful, that's all... Using some upside-down terminology in Leo's video could be for the best. This is the art and persona which is imagined, so it should be. But it seems imbalanced with explanations for the concept of pointer.

???


It's Love.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@nuwu Mmh, interesting. I thought it would be if by the logic under which the suffering holds a transcending is achieved.

But I like liebe yours more.

Edited by Windappreciator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@RendHeaven The point is, Leo's teachings are structured in a way implying art is evil, and physical suicide is the only option. This approach can itself become a wall of suffering and fear.

@Windappreciator It's not based on logic, our feelings are king in the primeval waters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0