Osaid

Are we really entertaining that God at its ultimate is a two-forked road between nihilism and non-nihilism? Is God a philosopher now? How convenient for the intellectually and philosophically minded. What is this cognitive dissonance? Is that all you see of life and reality? Ground yourselves. This is like imagining a dirt house and thinking "I'm gonna live in my imagination because that's what God wants." What is the most obvious and simplest explanation? That God is a philosopher who juggles between meaning and nihilism? Or that God is being anthropomorphized by a human ego? If triangles had a God they would give it 3 sides. If humans had a God they would give it an existential nihilistic crisis.

The idea of solipsism gave you an existential crisis, and now you are left choosing between nihilism or non-nihilism. It looks really pretty when you add the word "God" in there though. God is apparently having an existential nihilistic crisis, and that is the ultimate intelligence at play?

That's pretty damn accurate as a summation. The "surrender" is really just a clear perception that that you cannot be inside the content of thought. It is a clear recognition of the nature of experience and how it contains itself. Once you see it you can't unsee it, and that is so called "enlightenment."

Ego can only ever be thought. All "I" statements are thought. All "I" statements are limitations because they are divisions and separations. All separation is limitation. You are being aware of thoughts of limitation, like "I am this or that." You, as unbounded infinite awareness, are being aware of the thoughts, but not being in the thoughts. Awareness can't be limited by what it is aware of, because it can't be inside of what it is aware of. You can't read a story while being in the story. Trying to get rid of barriers is like trying to get rid of unicorns. You can't get rid of what is inside of imagination because only something which exists inside of imagination could do that. You are not someone who hunts unicorns. You are not someone who hunts down barriers. You can only realize that you aren't inside of imagination in the first place.

The dreaded E word. We don't use such terms around these parts.

All of which would have to be imaginary. Like imagining blue and yellow unicorns. Finite is thought. You are aware of the thought of being finite, like "I have incarnated into a body/unicorn." You are being the thought, not being in the thought. You can't be inside of what you are aware of. You can't read a story while being in the story.

Ego can't do any of that because unicorns can't do any of that. The ego is any story or statement you make of it. You can't read a story while being in the story. You are being aware of things, not being in what you are aware of. The idea that the ego can return is itself ego. There it is, right there, in the idea: "the ego will return."

Quote from the edited version: Meaning, there is no higher level, because higher level is in contrast to ego/body, which itself is imagination and thought. The entire thing is ego/imagination.

Only what is imaginary can be imagined. If the body is being imagined at a higher level, then the body and the higher level are both imaginary.

Ego is thought. Your statement relates itself to ego, therefore it confirms the existence of ego, therefore it is ego. Because it claims that the body relates to ego in some way. Therefore, the formulation in the sentence is itself is just thought and ego.

Can something you think die? Do unicorns die? If you think you're a body.

"It" will return "next time"? Interesting thought but no thanks. The unicorn population will be dearly missed.

Use hydroxyapatite toothpaste. Make sure to floss regularly, work your way up to it slowly if your gums are weak and bleed easily. Brush your tongue and also the top of your mouth. If it is a natural hydroxyapatite toothpaste, it is essentially going to be entirely edible, you don't have to rinse with water and it is recommended you don't (just spit all of it out without water) and I find that this helps keep the oral microbiome in check for longer (clean, no bad breath). The toothpaste I use has sorbitol and peppermint oil in order to mediate the oral microbiome, so maybe look for those. Control what you eat, make sure it is not overly sticky and carby. It should be something that your saliva easily breaks down and emulsifies. Essentially stick to whole foods. In the morning I eat 1 tbsp of butter and coconut oil and coat the inside of my gums and teeth with it, gives it a protective layer. I'll have 1 tbsp at the end of the day too. Let food be your oral medicine. Chew thoroughly and properly. Should be like baby food at the end. You can imagine you're chewing as if there is a rock or needle in the food. It's important that your saliva properly lubricates the food and mouth. Make sure your mouth isn't dry. Hydrate.

There is just the thought. The thought is equivalent to conditioning. Being aware of the thought "25 years of old conditioning" is the conditioning and subsequent identity which is felt currently, as the thought. You are being the thought, not being in the thought. 25 years can't be thought of, or experienced. 25 years is not caused by 25 years. 25 years only exists from the vantage point of "25 years after." 25 years is thought, in every sense. You are aware of the thought "25 years", you are not being in the thought. Thought is not caused by what happened 25 years ago. Conditioning is not caused by what happened 25 years ago. You cannot experience the cause of experience. Conditioning is felt currently, as the thought.

The idea that mind/ego has a paradigm and gets crushed, is itself mind/ego. Like saying: "How come unicorns keep coming back after having their paradigms crushed?" The idea of an ego, is ego. Don't confuse the map for the territory. Don't fight ghosts. Fighting ghosts is ego. Ego is a ghost. The idea of awakening, going here, doing this and that to rid yourself of ego, is itself ego. Conception. Separation. Division. Look at how the thoughts feel. Look at how the division feels. Look at who is being aware of thoughts and division. You are not in thoughts/division, you are being aware of it. You can't read a story while being in a story. There is no reason beyond reason. Reason is imagination. All is uncaused. You are uncaused. Reason is uncaused. Imagination is uncaused. Imagination can't cause anything therefore reason can't cause anything. You are aware of what is caused, therefore you are not in the cause.

Luckily, mind is not physical. Mind can "die" before body dies. "Body" is itself mind. "It" can happen without having to wait for death. It can happen right now.

❤️

You fail to realize that this is a koan you've created, which points to nothing. Sound of one hand clapping. Sound of a tree falling with no one around to hear it. Sound of God creating itself before it existed?

Nothing changed except the thought of it. Your thought of it. Your understanding of it. Which was "false" in the same way that there can't be a unicorn that understands things. There can't be "you" which "understands" or thinks of "it" or anything at all because there aren't any "things" aside from the thought of "things." Thought can't understand thought. A thought about things can't understand another thought about things. Recursion error. Catch-22. Onto the question of "what remains?" Assuming you also let go of the story that there is "you" which can "let go of stories", then what remains can only be... Nothing. No things. Not a thing. Infinity. Nothingness. Non-definitiveness. etc.

For real haha

∅

Because it seems like you think that something can't exist. Every single thing that exists can't not be itself. That means everything that exists by your definition is an existential limitation. It seems like a redundant conceptualization to me, but you do you.

It is "false" in the sense that you can't ever be what the imagination points to, because every single thing it points to is divided and limited. You can't imagine something which is not a thing. You can't imagine nothing, otherwise it stops being imagination. Meaning, you can't imagine something which is not limited by another thing, otherwise it stops being imagination. A thing is always limited by other things because it is relative. Which means you can't ever be dual or limited, because you are the one imagining. You are imagining, but you aren't imagining yourself. If you imagine yourself, that splits you into two: the one imagining and the one that is being imagined. It creates a recursion error. You have created an imagination which tries to point to experience, but that imagination has to be part of experience. You can't use yourself to point to yourself.

It's not an existential limitation because it is imagination. Your imagination can't limit anything existentially. Your imagination is itself something that exists. Existence can't limit itself through non-existence. Non-existence is not something that actually exists, by definition. Its like asking "why isn't the word donkey actually a donkey?" Because then it wouldn't be a word anymore, it would be a donkey. In order for a word to exist as a word, it can't be an actual donkey. In order for impossibility to exist as impossibility, it can't be possible. Again, you're stuck in this intellectual catch-22. You can't find proof because proof can never be the thing that is being proved. There is no proof for imagination outside of imagination. The entire thing is imaginary. When it becomes something that isn't imagination, it becomes possible, and so it isn't impossible. And so you continue to ask "why doesn't imagination exist as something that isn't imagination?" It "doesn't exist" in the sense that the contents of imagination don't exist as something outside of imagination. Meaning, imagination is never not imagination. It's not that impossibility can only be imagined, it's that impossibility is always imagination and it can't not be imagination. When you say "it can't actually exist", you are expecting imagination to be something which isn't imagination, and then perceiving that as non-existence. There can't be a thing that actually "can't exist." You have to imagine that first. Thus it only exists as imagination. Imagination does exist, it just can't point to anything that exists outside of itself. Even if everything did exist, you would still imagine impossibility, because imagination still exists. This further elaborates on the catch-22 I was talking about earlier. It's like looking at "1 + 1 = 3" and then going "how come I can't find any proof for it"? Because it is defined in a way where you can't find proof for it. It is a thing without proof, by definition. If it has proof, then it stops being that thing. You can only ask questions about it but the questions can't have an answer because that is how it defines itself. It only exists as a question. It is intellectual stagnation.

Sounds like vulnerable/covert NPD. Research vulnerable/covert NPD. BPD is often comorbid with NPD. The line between the two is quite thin actually, but I digress. If they fit vulnerable/covert NPD very well and you suspect them to have it, then the relationship is probably not salvageable since they are probably purposefully abusing you. Diagnoses aside, listen to how you feel and think above all else. You don't need to know what their diagnostics are to know whether you should stay or not. Do you feel constant anxiety around them? Do they gaslight? Do they manipulate? Do they instill a false hope that they will change or get better, only to contradict that sentiment time and time again? Do you want to experience all of those things for a significant period of your life time? I have to say though, everything you described is textbook covert narcissism. I am 100% convinced they have covert NPD.