Breakingthewall

Really? Then I didn't read properly your post, seemed to me that you said that what I said is absurd, without having understood it.

Mystic vs material means nothing. Reality is not made of atoms. Atoms are made of protons and neutrons, which in turn are made of quarks bound together by gluons, which in turn are local vibrations of the quark field and the gluon field, and these fields are vibrational possibilities of reality, meaning they are fields of possible potentiality. Science can understand reality because, ultimately, the foundation of reality is the absence of limitations, from which coherent relationships arise. What is certainly impossible is a god who is bored and dreams dreams to live adventures, for many obvious reasons. The first one, that god would be limited to that will .

That's great that you think that you are so smart, shows good self confidence and it's very good, but maybe you should ask what I meant instead that's showing your teacher attitude. Are you sure that you have understood? Maybe not.

I used to get very emotionally triggered with my family. My parents died when I was very young, but I have other close family, I lived with them, then with a sister, etc. Once all emotional charge faded, all that's left is boredom. I find them utterly boring. If I have to get together with them, like on December 25th, I take some LSD before so I can stand some hours talking without getting sleep.

The explanation is long but absolutely obvious. If you want, I'll tell you. In short, yes, neurons create what we call consciousness, and consciousness is the reality in a concrete form. And neurons are a construct of reality; they are reality in a concrete expression of enormous complexity that inevitably occurs and is completely understandable, not mysterious at all.

If consciousness desires things and establishes rules, it's not "consciousness" but "an entity that desires things and establishes rules." So, on what basis does it establish those rules? On its own will? And on what basis is that its will? Why does it want gray elephants and not pink ones? Because it compare them to blue giraffes? Then, is this entity, which has an infinite database, a consequence of that database? And where does that database come from? Let's see, this view of reality is, to put it mildly, inconsistent.

I'd say that this is impossible because if any reality arises implies it's logic. The question is whether you understand it or not, but the fact that it exists implies logic always. Same than always, absolutely always, implies limits. Without limits there is the unlimited, nothing defined. If there is anything, there are limits, and how those limits connect implies a coherence, a logic. Another necessary condition is delay. Without delay there is not process, delay is the fundamental limit. From it the other limits arise. Without delay everything would be simultaneous, then formless, no becoming, no thing. So the absolute has a lot of limitations. The number one: it can't not be. 2, can't be limited, only in appearance. 3, can't stop manifesting. Etc etc etc

The matter is essentially simple: it consists of deactivating the energetic barriers of the psyche that create a flow trapped in symbolism. If you do this, you might think: so simple. But if you are trapped in symbols and archetypes, like everyone else, it won't be easy at all, because all your psychological functioning is filtered through these energetic structures. The archetypes of your psyche carry energetic charge, and this charge comes from default human programming, genetics. The fear of rejection and destruction, the desire to belonging and permanence, build barriers that take the form of symbols: good/evil, divine/human, god/ego, whatever. The flow of your mind bounces off these barriers, and you can't avoid it; it's part of you.

Absolutely exactly There are the same. Human mind has the ability to understand the logic of the relationship. This also includes completely counterintuitive logics such as the principle of decoherence or mathematics of chaos . Absolutely everything that exists is organized coherently; the fact of existing implies coherence, and any coherence can be mathematically defined. God doesn't want, because if it wants it would be a relative entity that wants limited things. God is not imagining the reality, it would be a dualistic scheme. God is the reality, and the reality develops itself in coherent relationships.

Knowing or understanding can be conceptual, direct, or open. Conceptual understanding is when there's a mental process that compares things with learned symbols and archetypes. There's what you want to understand, the symbolic software as a filter, and you. Direct understanding is without symbolism; for example, you go outside and see a hungry tiger walking toward you. You understand the matter directly and immediately. And finally, open understanding is when you perceive the flow of reality and become one with it. There's no subject understanding an object; rather, reality unfolds and understands itself.

@TruthFreedom Let's see, as @Carl-Richard says, all these ideas of solipsism, that there's nothing outside your experience, that you're God creating reality, are logical constructs. So, if you make logical constructs, why do you make the ones that seem, let's say, less logical? To feel special, different, cool? Yes, okay, you can tell me you awakened to that fact by taking drugs, but that's nothing to me because once, while taking drugs, I awakened to the fact that all the women in a club wanted sex with me. It was a total awakening, undeniable. But then, well, it needed some qualification. So maybe to make logical deductions it's better to use logic than drugs.

You can see absolutely totally fully how reality is structuring itself constantly, how its flow is organized. It's a liviing movement that can be detected everywhere. The point is that it's not something linear, defined, archetypal, black and white. It's the character of reality, its nature. If you want to see, you have to eliminate the barriers. Then you intuit the true nature of the reality in everything. Understanding It's about openess not about knowledge.

Yes of course, what I meant is that superficial or deep depend on your perspective, not the object itself; I suppose they're two ways of expressing the same thing. Let's say there are two ways to operate psychologically: from the outside or from the inside. From the outside, it means adopting social paradigms and equating happiness with fulfilling those paradigms. success, beauty, fame, honor, whatever. This becomes limiting; your vision is separate from you, filtering everything according those paradigms. You're a social robot incapable of opening yourself to depth in the slightest. You live in a crust of ice, and you can only see your reflection; everything is filtered through your self-image. If you manage to free yourself from this psychological structure that operates through symbols and archetypes, your vision instantly becomes profound. When your psyche is fragmented into archetypes, it is fragmented into barriers. Energy is contained, it bounces around, creates self-referential vortices, and gets trapped. When these energetic barriers disappear, reality automatically becomes fluid, without borders, without definition; then everything is seen as energetic currents, flows of reality that are not classifiable. That's the difference between superficial or profound, means with barriers or without. You could be a genius that operates with barriers, like saint Augustine of ipona for example, or a retarded who perceive the depth in its absolute absence of limitations

The limited is an expression the unlimited. If you perceive the form in its depth, you realize that it is total; it just doesn't seem so from the surface.

What a child needs is challenge, exposure, and reality. Because behind every child lies the wild, and the wild is the expression of openness. Exposure and challenge connect you with the true nature of being. Protection and the fulfillment of all needs separate you. Then you would become a emo absolutely lost in the social jungle. Well, same than everyone else.

It's inevitable. The fact of existing implies change , change implies relationship and the condition for any relationship is logic. What is not logic is simply inexistent, can't exist because it's not synchronized. If anything exist there is a perfect logic behind it. Perhaps we don't understand that logic, but it exists.

Yes me too, I spent a while thinking about those words to see if I could find the meaning, but all that came to mind was a loop. It's like that thing about: what is the sound of one hand clapping? And then the student suddenly achieves enlightenment. to me that sounds like: you don't understand this, right? But I do. Am I mysterious? Okay, you are, can you explain it to me? The explanation appears when the mind falls. Wtf

All knowledge and experience is form, relationship, becoming. This doesn't imply that it's false or contemptible, but rather that it's a manifestation of reality. According to you, there is an essential reality, and that's what you truly are, right? Absolute being, or whatever you want to call it. But thoughts are an expression of that reality, therefore they are real.

You're addressing a much more complex topic than it seems. Let's see, 1- humans don't create logic, they discover it. Logic is previous than the thought 2- logic means coherence, and coherence doesn't mean order, mean relationships that doesn't cancel each other out; they mesh together 3- logic is not content, is form. Logic doesn't say what's real, say how has to behave any relationship to doesn't contradict itself. Then logic is the first limitation possible in the unlimited. Or in another words, logic is the necessary condition to existence. What is not logic doesn't exist. It's absolutely impossible. Logic is relation, relation is change, change is existence.

for me that have no meaning. Saying that is something within the story that claims it doesn't exist, so it's like a mental loop. The story says that history doesn't exist. What does that mean? A kind of koan. Koans imply that the mind is an obstacle, but I don't think so. The obstacle is the errors of the mind, not the mind itself.

Maybe before physical birth, but you can't remember it because it's the rule in this exotic dimensión. You will remember in the very moment when you die. I mean, who knows about anything? It's absolutely totally impossible doing those assessments

Who knows? Perhaps you're operating in thousands of dimensions simultaneously to achieve the exact energy frequency needed for the demigod level, which you've been trying to attain for eons without success. Your multidimensional family is very disappointed in you and will probably decide to eliminate you if you don't succeed this time. Shameful.

Exactly Usually are misleading , they imply that reality is not real and that there is another, higher reality that is. It would be more accurate to say forms and formlessness, for example. Form is not false, it's limited. Limited doesn't mean false, means limited. It's not less real than unlimited, it's just limited. Real and unreal are adjectives that categorizes reality, so they are absolutely wrong. Spirituality is absolutely wrong formulated, that's why nobody understands it, because it's impossible to understand. What changes is the form, the formless can't change. The form and the formless are not two different categories are two aspects of reality. The formless is essence, form is appearance. Reality always has an appearance or form, since "always" implies time, and time is equivalent to form. Time means delay between changes. Without delay there is no change; a limit on the speed of change is necessary for it to be change. Then "always" change and form are because the the interval between changes is outside of time; it does not exist. Existing is a verb, means happening. Existence is the expression of reality, that is absence of limitations, openess, absolute being It's the same as the self and dual consciousness. There is always a self and dual consciousness from the perspective of the self and dual consciousness, since the interval without consciousness is not conscious of itself. The point is to understand that the self is not someone, not a soul or a subject, and conciseness is not something, just a form that the reality takes; it is a consequence of a center that appears when reality reflects upon itself, creating a self-preserved universe that operates within the framework of the primary universe, what we call life. Reality don't need consciusness, it's not consciusness. Consciousness is a form of the reality that happens when center that register the reality appears. In the unlimited possibilities are infinite centers that register the reality, all are the same, the reality in a form.

In other words, experience is reality structured in a certain way. Duality, a self-preserving system that creates a center which registers reality, creating an experience, a becoming to which continuity and meaning are given. But that is not reality; it is a form of reality. Reality without that center or self is exactly the same as with it, only without registering differences. Opening yourself to what reality is without a center or self is enlightenment. Reality is something, because it is, it is totality. It is not definable; you can be it but not thinking it. You already are it, just remove the veil and that's it.

The point is to see that the self is a center that registers reality, and thus experience arises. Therefore, one self is the same as another self, just a center. As you said, without a self there is no experience, because experience is reality in a certain dualistic way. The point is to see that reality is not experience, but rather that experience is made of reality, experience is reality in an specific structure. So what's reality without experience? Reality without center, or without self. What's that? Enlightenment.