Breakingthewall

I guess so, but seems that possible suffering is proportional to possible depth, it's the price

Yeah, at a given moment, something can resonate with you very deeply, and even if you later realize it was a limited perspective at the time, it made you take a step toward opening up. Whether you stay there forever or keep moving forward until the end is up to you.

Sure, but you will see accurate what resonates with you, then if you are In the typical state of suffering/rumination, limited, with fear and confusion, thats the tipical when you feel attracted by spirituality, when you hear someone say: You are creating your suffering with your mental activity, due to erroneous thought patterns. To change them, you must realize that the self is illusory and that there is no one. Then you will believe that and try to create a no-self mental framework, limiting yourself even more

who judge the quality of the word?

People don't understand that being "liberated" or "enlightened" is an energetic state. It's a way of flowing: open versus closed. So, you can fluctuate between the two. By default, we operate in a closed state, so achieving an open state isn't easy and it's not permanent. Anyone who says enlightenment is knowing something is operating from a closed state. Almost everyone in spirituality operates from that state, but they believe they're enlightened because they've expanded the normal human frame into one where they believe they are consciousness or God or whatever. It's still a closed frame. The open frame is being totally open to the living flow of reality, and with that, perceiving the unlimited absolute and being the unlimited absolute. It's something absolutely alive and direct, centerless and open, without borders or edges.

It depends on what you want in your life. I want to live completely open to reality, without the shell of the self. It's completely unnecessary, just a hindrance

Yes I broke it until no brick remained, but then the challenge is breaking it without any substance. It's not impossible.

I don't know if there are subtle realms. Maybe there are. But when someone takes psychedelics and deceives themselves, I wouldn't say it's because they're deceived by some entity. Rather, they deceive themselves because they have a great desire for validation. So great that they would choose validation over anything else. So, they create a peculiar psychological structure in which they believe what suits their purposes, then in the trip they see what they need to see to believe their history.

I chose that name because I was doing 5 meo again and again and I always find a wall before my face. Then I started to look in internet some advices and I found this forum, where many knew about 5meo, and that was the name that came to my mind

Do you think that they are dark energies that makes psychedelic travelers be influenced by them? I think it's simply their narcissism, which prevents them from truly opening up. They only find what they're really looking for: self-importance. No demon is needed to deceive them, since they long to be deceived; in fact, their psychic structure is self-deception.

The Christ archetype comes closer to true openness, probably more than any other mystical figure. It involves the total humiliation of the ego, the total opening of the heart through the acceptance of martyrdom, the surrender after which the closed capsule opens and total glory is manifested. The problem is that it is interpreted as if Jesus is a divine being and must be worshipped. Jesus is the core within every human being; the Trinity is the threefold division of humanity: the Father, the Absolute from which reality emanates; the Son, the heart of the individual in whom the Total dwells; the Holy Spirit, the Mind, which creates a new dimension of existence. Only through the Son does one access the "Kingdom of Heaven," becoming one with the Total. Only through the total opening of the heart does one see that one is one with the Absolute

I don't know what you're talking about. I was talking about honor killings. It has no relationship with gaza, then I don't know why you said that. Regarding Gaza, I had some doubts before and thought the Israelis had the right to defend themselves, but now it seems obvious that they're criminal genocidaires and that Europe should take a firm stand against them. They're a shame to Western civilization, and I think that most of European governments are going to move in that direction. It wasn't clear at first, but it's becoming clearer.

There is a Sufi mystic very similar to Christ, al hallaj. His best-known phrase is "ana al haq," "I am the truth," for which he was tortured and crucified. He embodies the essence of Christ but with language much more direct to the absolute. Is say it is an example of total enlightenment, without any crack, totally opened to the unlimited

Ok, then as the massacre in Gaza is evil, it's ok widespread forced marriages and "honor" killings, and in short the absolute oppression of women. Strange logic, but if for you it works, good.

Those crimes are very common, but anyway, think what fits better for your narrative

Form means differentiation, without differentiation there is nothing. Not happiness or anything else.

If there is no form, there is nothing, and in the absence of limits, form will eventually arise again. So, there will always be form. But form doesn't always have to be suffering. There are infinite possibilities. The most complex thing we know is the human form, which is quite suffering. But there may be other, less dense forms, dimensions that we literally cannot imagine. Furthermore, any other life form other than human is considerably less suffering. If you're a bird, for example, everything is perfect 90% of the time. With humans, the mental dimension arises, the ego, etc., and we already know that it's crazy, but that's not all there is to it. Perhaps it's just a temporary form. I would say that we have to give it our all here. Then, who knows?

God isn't an entity that decides things; it's an unfathomable hole from which existence springs. Forms are created and destroyed in an infinite dance. So there are two options: either you dance aligned with the flow and open to it's depth, or misaligned and closed. But you'll dance anyway.

If we want to open ourself to the absolute, we have to kiss Kali, the goddess of destruction, open your heart to her. Kali is the living form of the bottomless. It is the aspect of reality that breaks down structures, because unlimited openness does not tolerate confinement. Where the self tries to assert itself, Kali cuts through it. Not to negate form, but to liberate its essence. Kali is wild, as the existence, dance of creation and destruction without mercy, if we deny the destruction and suffering, we are closed to the unfathomable. Form is yin and yang, and it's impossible that there is no form. No choice.

Sure, today in the news in my country, it was reported that two Pakistani sisters refused to marry the men their father had ordered. Since they were in Europe, they couldn't do anything to them. Instead, they tricked them by saying their grandmother was sick. They went to Pakistan, where their brothers were waiting to strangle them to death. The Pakistani court acquitted them because their parents forgave them. It seems that women there are like cattle, someone's property, so if that person forgives the murderers, there's no crime. Now they're on trial here, not for murder, but for forced marriage.

I'll give you an example: the Assyrians were very son of a bitch people. They had a torture system where they would put a guy in a box, and only his head and hands would come out. They would leave him in the countryside with two guards who would force him to eat and drink. Then the insects would arrive, and after a few days, tens of thousands of them would devour him. The idea was to keep him alive for a month being devoured by insects Well, this horrible shit, being open to the total is infinitely better than being in your house in a city, isolated, and surrounded by energetic walls that isolate you until you die of old age.

There is only one definition: I am that. And it's the absolute, open, total, bottomless depth. And from it the existence explodes with the power given of the limitlessness, that is total. The source of the reality is a hole without bottom, but this hole is full of everything, because it has not bottom

In contrast to your poem, some logical description, let's see if you see it Absolute openness is not a thing, nor an entity, nor a form. It cannot be defined positively without betraying its nature, because every affirmation creates a limit, and absolute openness is precisely the absence of all limits. It is not a substance, nor a void, nor a being, nor a consciousness. It is nothing that can be conceived in opposition to anything else. It is not “nothing,” because nothingness is the negation of something, and this already establishes a conceptual border. Nor is it “something,” because something is differentiated from other things, and all differentiation implies relation and limitation. It is not emptiness, because emptiness only has meaning in contrast to fullness, and that duality is impossible at the level of the absolute. But it's the absence of lack, because the openess is absolute potential. Maybe you could call it God, but not because it's a creator, but because is the source of any possibility

Good point, to say that the absolute is infinity is a mistake. The absolute is the absence of limits. It is not something, it has no dimension, it is neither empty nor full, it is total openness. Infinity would be an inevitable consequence.

In my opinion, he's approaching the issue backwards. He says: Infinity can only create logical things; anything illogical cannot exist. Rather, it would be: everything that manifests is relative, that is, relational. Every relation is logical, since they are two equivalent words. And that's it, there's no need of more. When he speaks of nothingness, it's the same. Nothingness is the absence of contrast or movement. Nothingness is ontologically the same as everything; nothingness is unmanifested reality, the absence of relationship, and "somethingness" is manifested reality, contrast. Since there are no limits, at some point there will be contrast, fluctuation, or relative movement. That moment is always, and its unfolding is unlimited.