Mason Riggle

There is actually nothing to do, because there is no 'you' separate from 'that which is not you'. There is just 1 thing happening the 1 way it is happening... and that 1 thing is 'everything that's happening'. 'you' are part of what is already happening, not a cause of what is happening, the same way a whirlpool occurs in a river, and isn't 'causing itself to swirl'. There is no 'whirlpool' that 'does things'. Whirlpools happen. To understand this, is to understand that you are always God. There is no 'disconnected from god'.. there is just God. There is nothing to do, other than 'be yourself' and you are always doing this, effortlessly. You never have to try to 'be how you are'.. you just 'are how you are' without trying.. any attempt to be 'other than how you are' is just more 'how you already are'. To understand this is, is to understand that you are always God.

If you don't get caught up in the words 'I' and 'think', it makes sense. You could say, 'inside therefor outside.' Or 'I am because I experience myself.' Or 'We are because I dream.' Or 'It is because it imagines.' The experience of existence is inseparable from the existence of experience.

Solipsism is really nothing more than the acknowledgement that I can't prove to myself that you are having an experience. Solipsism can be rejected, because I also can't prove to myself that you are not having an experience. It 'seems' to me like you are having an experience, just like it 'seems' like there are trees... and that seems to be the same as there 'actually' being trees, and you 'actually' having an experience.

@CBDinfused no reason it can't be. You are part of 'my experience', I am part of yours.. they are both part of the same Experience(happening). Similarly, when I see a tree, everything occurring inside the tree seems to be occurring, even if I can only see the outside of the tree. The tree and [my perspecive] are both part of everything. Is there anything inside the tree if I can't experience it, or is there only stuff going on inside the tree when I look? That part doesn't seem to matter.

@CBDinfused I think it's because the 'shape' of the one thing there is, is a strange loop. A paradox. It defies logic. It's a dog chasing it's own tail, thinking it's tail is separate from itself. It's finite infinity. It's really imaginary. It's imaginarily real. The one thing (singular) there is, is everything (plural).

@SOUL ^this part of what you said is True. @IncognitoNotice the 'IF'.. 'if you want'... what if I don't want? Who decides what I want? Also, I can't have 'other choices' that the ones that arise. Consider, if you were me (maybe you are), then you would be making the exact choices I am making right now. You would have no choice but to do so. ^this is not correct. I equate 'the brain' with 'the body'. If 'I' am not 'my body', then who am I? Who are you talking to?

@Incognito hmmmm. Is my brain not 'my body'? I understand that my organism makes choices, like choosing these words carefully, but... could it make 'other choices' than the ones it does make? Also, I am an animal. But a rather intelligent dexterous one. I have powerful cognitive reasoning and memory function, which allow me to make vastly more complex choices than say, a mouse.. There's no magical 'free will' or 'self' hiding somewhere inside my organism telling my organism what to do, that separates me from 'other animals'. My organism functions all on it's own, just like a tree does, or a starfish.. which is exactly how it will.

"Our pleasures, however refined or easily acquired, are by their very nature fleeting. They begin to subside the instant they arise, only to be replaced by fresh desires or feelings of discomfort. You can’t get enough of your favorite meal until, in the next moment, you find you are so stuffed as to nearly require the attention of a surgeon—and yet, by some quirk of physics, you still have room for dessert. The pleasure of dessert lasts a few seconds, and then the lingering taste in your mouth must be banished by a drink of water. The warmth of the sun feels wonderful on your skin, but soon it becomes too much of a good thing. A move to the shade brings immediate relief, but after a minute or two, the breeze is just a little too cold. Do you have a sweater in the car? Let’s take a look. Yes, there it is. You’re warm now, but you notice that your sweater has seen better days. Does it make you look carefree or disheveled? Perhaps it is time to go shopping for something new. And so it goes. We seem to do little more than lurch between wanting and not wanting. Thus, the question naturally arises: Is there more to life than this? Might it be possible to feel much better (in every sense of better) than one tends to feel? Is it possible to find lasting fulfillment despite the inevitability of change? Spiritual life begins with a suspicion that the answer to such questions could well be “yes.” And a true spiritual practitioner is someone who has discovered that it is possible to be at ease in the world for no reason, if only for a few moments at a time, and that such ease is synonymous with transcending the apparent boundaries of the self. Those who have never tasted such peace of mind might view these assertions as highly suspect. Nevertheless, it is a fact that a condition of selfless well-being is there to be glimpsed in each moment. Of course, I’m not claiming to have experienced all such states, but I meet many people who appear to have experienced none of them—and these people often profess to have no interest in spiritual life." - Sam Harris

This doesn't really explain anything. Can you expand on this? How does one become conscious of their choices, or make the unconscious conscious? I'm inclined to wonder if one can do either of these things if it never occurs to them to do them, and then I wonder who decides what occurs to them.

@Dodo I get what you're saying. I just think your map could be a little more accurate. I'm pointing to something as well.

@Dodo they aren't equivalent from a relative point of view.. all maps are not equally accurate. ^I think this is one of the worst memes out there.. it may be the case that someone deliberately drew a 9, and it's a 9, and one of those two people is simply wrong.

@Dodo lmao.. that's kinda muh whole point.. it MUST appear how it likes.

I see subtle differences.. the word 'can' implies choice.. it implies that it has the option of appearing how it likes, or not. This seems like an error of language to me, which causes illusions like 'free will'. Yeah, well, that's just like, your opinion, man.

Well.. technically you said that it 'can' do whatever it likes to - that it 'can' appear how it likes to. I think it's a more accurate map to say it 'does' do whatever it likes to. It's a subtle difference, I agree.. but I think an important one, as long as we're peeling back the layers of truth here..

^this is perfect. And since the code is coding itself.. it will always code itself exactly how it desires/wants/likes to, and never any other way.

But don't you get that 'the programmer' is just another function? And that it's turtles all the way down?

@Dodo just because we are not separate, does not mean the organism Mason Riggle can know what the organism Dodo is thinking. There is no separation the same way a 'whirlpool' is not separate from a river. The whirlpool is a function of the river.. I am a function of the entire Universe. The words I type are a function of the organism Mason Riggle.. but it's all one big system happening all together, and the 'parts' can not be 'singled out' as the 'original cause of' any other part..

From any perspective, the Universe is exactly how it is, and never other than how it is.

@Dodo and what if I said there is no separation between 'me' and 'that which is not me', and that 'my words' are actually 'the Universes words'.. similar to the way you don't consider these words as 'coming from your device', even though that's the most proximate medium that's currently delivering them to you.

I can say it in these terms.. whatever is occurring now, must be occurring just as it is, and could not be occurring other than how it is.

@Dodo it can't be mapped 100% accurately.. but maps can be 'better' and 'worse'.. I don't get to say, 'In reality, horses are born inside out until Santa turns them the right way round'.. and suggest that it's just a 'map' and doesn't matter how closely it maps onto reality. It's just as good as your map.

@TreyMoney how does one decide where to direct one's consciousness / awareness?

I'm one to say that 'choice' is nonsensical. It doesn't map onto reality.

@Dodo semantics are important. These subtle differences can be huge, especially when it comes to causing egos to disappear, as the illusion of ego often arises as a result of the language humans use. Consider that when we say, "I am thinking.." this gives rise to the notion of a 'thinker' in addition to 'thinking', however if we say, 'thinking is occurring', this leaves no room for any 'thinker' to creep in. Semantics are huge.

@Dodo who is it that 'sees through the illusion'? Ego is a notion that comes and goes like a whirlpool in a river.. it's there when conditions for it to exists arise, and it's not when those conditions are not the case. The ego can not get rid of ego.. that's just more ego. The ego can, however, vanish..