Hi, I just wanted to maybe start a discussion on the dynamics of self inversion vs expansion, since this is something I've been working on for a while and I realized that this is the weekly assignment. Something I noticed right off the bat that stuck out to me as very significant is how it is described as "a focus on personal needs that leads to dissatisfaction." I'd like to share some personal experience as someone who has probably experienced a lot of this dynamic. It seems that for me personally, whenever I actively participate heavier into "self agenda" kind of stuff, I go into this self inversion place. Or when I'm in my head trying to figure something out or "fix something," or some such. Essentially it feels like I'm trying to do something for myself. Something "good for me." I have tended to confuse it with discipline in the past, since the mindset might seem like I'm working hard to get something for myself, but it almost seems like an obsession on self needs more than anything else upon questioning it. It we're going off of a definition "a focus on personal needs that leads to dissatisfaction," then that would mean I've got a lot of that going on. It would make sense why Brendan would tell me to come "out here" a lot during the spring retreat. It seems like my experience hovers around these "personal needs," which may inherently lead to deep self inversion. I have actually noticed that when I humble myself and live for something greater than myself my happiness goes way up. My experience is actually freed from having to serve these bullshit needs. And live for something greater than myself doesn't mean like I commit my life to feeding the poor of something. It almost just feels more in alignment in a more direct sense to something more fundamentally true or important. Anyway, don't mind my ramblings I just wanted to contribute

Why Don't You Create a Religion?

Been working on this book for couple weeks now, Peter lays it out so simply but will take some doing to really get there. But so far, so good.

Before my phone decided it wasn't playing, I was listening to talk about the nature of objects. I remembered that the perception of what is, is limited by our sense "organs(?)". If a bee was looking at the table it would see something very different, or if I had electron microscopes for eyes I would see it as molecules. Is it actually possible to see anything as it is or is the point to realise that we never can?

Thanks to Victor for the “I am an object moving around other objects” exercise. Watching/feeling ME move my body feels useful as a tool to pursue “What am I?”