Breakingthewall

Then conciousness is a place where many things appear and dissapear. It's not pure conciousness, it's conciousness where mountains and that appears. Why they do?

completely agree, but to do what you're talking about, you have to take a step that no technique is going to help you take. You have to, sober or on psychedelics, stare straight into a baseless abyss that opens before you, bottomless, which is called death. You have to hold that gaze, and without clinging to any idea of consolation, affirm with absolute truth: I want to dissolve into that abyss, expecting nothing except dissolution, letting go of any hope or possibility. It's not a thought, but an action. Then your body disappears, your mind too, and the absolute opens before you, and you blend with it. You are that, and that is absolutely empty, death, absolute nihilism. You have to hold it until the observer dissolves and opens, then the whole is revealed. It's everything, there is no center and you are that .

That's reductionist. Pure raw consciousness is now walking down the street at 45-degree temperatures with a phone in hand. Why?

What is the truth?

You might ask yourself why your messages aim to belittle, humiliate, ridicule, laugh at, join your fellow mod in ridiculing together, but under no circumstances make the slightest allusion to the content of my posts and refute them. It seems you feel your mental framework is threatened and you defend yourself with these strategies. It doesn't affect me; it just bores me a little but in other hand it's interesting. Anyway, you could look at it and try to understand your attitude. Where is it pointing? What are you afraid of? Id say that the content I post is quite good quality. Do you think that the attitude of mocking and trying to humiliate is , let's say, justified? For what reason? In my opinion it's obvious: defense. If you are defending your ideas on that way , seems that they are essential to your psychological structure. Then that of no self is more self. That's the thread is about, thanks for illustrating it so good

I said that the conceptual mind is an expression of reality. How can that not be true? Perhaps instead of denying it to help me, you could try to understand it. There's no need to feel threatened by new possibilities.

Not exact, if you were trying to help me, you would enter the conversation as an equal, trying to understand my points and qualify them, not dismissing them as "mind" and distorting the conversation by shifting paradigms in every post to hover above. It's more of a narcissistic competition where the only goal is to win.

Who watch that? The self that doesn't exist?

It's interesting to interact in this forum because if you are bit insightful you realize that spirituality is mostly narcissism. Narcissism means that you put first your emotional stability and then the truth, so you can adapt the reality to your psychological needs in a very deep level, and you can believe it. That's why communication is so difficult, you could see the thread that I started as "anti human spirituality". People there entered to say literally nothing but very angry. If you ask them: well, expose your points. They evade and say anything else and try to belittle you. Same here. Then you write this without thinking, but if anyone else write anything is from the ego mind. So the difference between ego or truth is that truth comes from you and ego from others. Ok.

You are so funny. Well, shame that you can't talk about a complex topic, maybe anyone else could, that's why I posted it

So now you have no mind? Then how did you write this paragraph?

Your anger is absolutely legitimate. It's the manifestation of something much deeper, stemming from your childhood, from a toxic dynamic. You must understand the deep energetic dynamic between you and your brother. Anger is just the tip of the iceberg, the manifestation of a toxic family dynamic inherited from generations. If you get to the bottom of it, you will have done enormous work toward understanding the foundations of your psychological structure. Don't run away from the situation, penetrate it. Run away is what is called "spirituality" , that is scapism. There is not you who can be angry, brother, love for you and for your holy family. Look, this doesn't work, it's just castration. you are a human, get deep in your humanity, it's glorious, even in its dark points

Well, everything is a manifestation of the absolute, then the ego or the conceptual mind must be so, can't be something separate. The point is that the mind can operate in a confused or an alienated way, or aligned. What sense does it make to the idea that reality is perfect or true except for the mind, which is false?

Then maybe you could say that all is self, or that all is direct, without a creator Awareness of that? Maybe he means "being". Different ways to express something that probably points to the same truth You cannot seek silence, but silence is created when the light of being shines. Being is everything; it is complete and total. Its quality is that it stands out and is full. But beyond this, it can be understood with the mind, since the mind is a manifestation of being. The mind is being in a form. The mind clears itself to dissipate the fog that clouds the glory of being, immutable in its essence, changing in its form. Then the mind, as a manifestation of being, can understand itself

I've presented a critique of spirituality that considers the self to be an illusory thought and explained how it blocks the search for and achievement of openness. If you read it, perhaps you can talk about it. If you're simply against any conceptual explanation because reality isn't conceptual, then you should retreat to silent meditation. If you don't like my explanation because it's "arrogant", well, I'm sorry that it's not aligned with your feelings and emotional stuff, but maybe the content should be more important than your emotions

Again, zero content, zero going into the arguments that I presented.

You could say that reality is made of bananas, but that would be a confusing definition. If you say that bananas are made of reality, you communicate more clearly, since you're speaking to another mind and want your vision to be its vision

A definition of enlightenment: two facets: form and essence. Form is unfathomable, the total, the limitless abyss of what is, manifesting as flux. You. Essence is its quality: it is being, brilliant, full. Being because it is, always, immutable in being. Brilliant because it stands out, luminous; that is its character. Full because it lacks nothing; it is everything. It's not one, not two, it's total.

Yes, because It's supposed to be the ultimate achievement and also the end of suffering, so people appear who sell it. It's a perfect place for narcissists, who partly believe what they say, but can't stand a profound critique of their mental framework without saying: "You don't understand because you haven't awakened." The issue of enlightenment doesn't have a globally accepted definition, and a consensus is currently emerging that it means identification with consciousness defining it as the screen where change arises.

What is conciousness according Buddha? How zen Buddhism changes the concept? What is conciousness according advaita Vedanta? What is conciousness according neo advaita? What is the relationship with the word conciousness with the term in Sanskrit sat chit Ananda, that in neo advaita is translated as conciousness? Over all: were is the difference between advaita Vedanta and neo advaita?

Sure. But something concrete, or it's just your emotional vibe? I know that reading something complex could be tired, so it's easy to get carried away by emotional impressions without understanding anything. But that doesn't make progress

Why you don't say where I'm wrong? stop trying to appear cool and talk about what is wrong in my explanation. It's boring talking in this level, but it's what it is, so let's try to make it higher

That is what I'm doing.

@UnbornTao I took some time to explain the point, if you have no interest about the point, then why did you ask me to resume? Just read and see what is wrong

Current spirituality assumes that the self is a thought, and therefore an illusion. So you can abandon that illusion by abandoning that thought, that false identification with your body, your social group, or whatever. This is false; the self has a genetic energetic basis that is impossible to ignore and that is given by millions of years of evolution and that is activated by social relationships, threats, etc The emotional barriers of fear of rejection, death and physical harm, or the desire to reproduce are not illusory thoughts, they are energetic realities. They can be overcome in the sense of seeing trough them, and the self can open itself to the absolute. But if they are assumed to be illusions, you are trapped without possibility of exit. The self will be always the case being a human, but an aligned self can open itself to the unlimited. It's an evolutionary step that is possible, but not "dropping" the self, because this is just impossible