Breakingthewall

It is logically impossible for God to exist with will and choice. If we define God without limits as the absolute creator, then God is absolute potentiality, the absence of limits. This God would be indifferent to the form that arises; it would be what allows any form to arise. The power of this God would be total, since it is totally open, but its control would be null. Absolutely indifferent; for Him, there would be no distinctions, only existence. Any emergence would carry within it absolute potential, totally openness, but it would not be created by God but would arise in God as an inevitable manifestation of its unlimited potential aka infinite power. Everything would be absolutely perfect because would be inevitable and complete. There would be no difference between a saint and a meth addict; both exist, therefore, they are equal. Everything that exists would be that God manifesting in its totality. Everything would be the same: an existence that contains infinite potential and is contained in infinite potential

You can conquer the world when your focus shifts from taking the most to giving the most. You're alive, flowing, and seeking beauty and connection, perfect timing and depth.

A society of enlightened people would be possible if technology made the struggle for survival unnecessary. The moment your survival is at stake, the rule that prevails is: me first, then you. And from here to war is only a step. When you and your children are hungry, you look for food, doesn't matter how

Obviously, it's not genocide, since genocide implies the intention to destroy an ethnic group, such as the Tutsis in Rwanda. The Israelis don't want to exterminate the Palestinians; they want to expel them. This doesn't mean they aren't guilty of a great injustice. We're already seeing the IDF intentionally shooting children and people in the distribution of food, preventing the entry of supplies, etc. But they don't want to kill millions of Palestinians; they want to kill as many as necessary to make them leave. I'm not defending Israel's actions. I think it's clear by now that they're supremacists and not "the most moral army in the world," but criminals. A real shame .

The point is to be connected to what life is and accept what it brings. When I said dissolving suffering, I meant understanding the psychological structures you've created as a defense throughout your life that allow you to function but close you down in return. This is hereditary; we come from thousands of generations of war, class struggle, the fight for reproduction, exploitation, slavery, misery, disease, and hunger. Or, if you prefer, life. The game of life is absolutely wild, but now the tiger seems asleep, and we think it's a friendly kitten.. At any moment he can wake up and show his fangs The only wise path is openness. Closing yourself off to protect yourself is stupid because it's impossible. Old age, illness, and death await us. Openness requires breaking through the psychological layers of protection and opening your being to its true essence. This isn't equivalent to erasing the self, but it does require erasing it, or rather, opening it up, making it transparent. The self is a much more complex structure than it seems; it's an interesting game to see through. Regarding what you say about pain and chronic illness, well, I don't know what I would do. You have to be in that situation to decide. My intuition tells me that this game is active in multiple dimensions, that there are different energetic levels of existence, and that the work I do now is reflected at different levels. But ultimately, what exists is living reality. If you're open to it, life is beautiful, the energy powerful. When the pain comes, we'll see.

I never do mental masturbation, I do understanding to the bottom.

What I do is understanding the structures to make them transparent, then let the totality opens. It works. You can't explain the totality, you can be open to it. Then you can explain what closes.

Without distinction there is not existence. Existence is made from relationship, you can't collapse then, you can see through them as they are transparent, then you see what reality is made of Because a biological structure made up of billions of relationships plus the conditioning of a lifetime, made up of billions of relationship, which makes a deep connection possible with a certain person with a certain structure made of billions of relationships

I don't judge people, I just highlight limited and wrong perspectives in an irritating and repellent way 😅

From a relative perspective (that's the perspective where we are operating) reality is built by relationships. You could say the the material is always the same, but this doesn't avoid the fact of the relationship. If you want to move beyond meaning to access an unlimited perspective uncontaminated by limits, then you must understand how meaning operates. All spirituality is created by people who have accessed an unlimited perspective without fully understanding limitation, natural mystics. Therefore, their formulation is never clean; it's intuitive but full of errors that close. We must formulate a perfect spirituality, clean, transparent, and flawless. Id say that you have a foundation of nobility that can make openness possible if you stop clinging to ideas that close things off. But to do so, you must first understand how they close things off, intuiting that there's something there that's clouding complete transparency.

Relationship means that if I jump for a bridge I will die, that doesn't means that I want to die Just a place for expression. I hope you don't feel offended.

Who said that meaning in not real? I'm just said that it's built of relationship

As a human, you are largely a hive entity. Everything you think, your emotions, your impulses, come from your relationships with others within a biological framework conditioned by millions of years of relationships with others. This isn't something negative that must be eliminated to become a plant, but rather something that must be understood so that it can flow cleanly, without obstacles. Normally, we operate from fear and lack; this is useful since it's the simplest and most functional evolutionary strategy. If you want to break out of that paradigm and operate from plenitude of openess, you must understand all your mechanisms, your psychological structure, confront the emotional mechanisms that underpin your drive, your movement, and move from a closed structure focused on avoiding the bad to an open structure that flows freely.

Meaning arises from relationship: cause and effect, synchronicity, or contrast between opposites. Any meaning is built on multiple layers of relationships. Ultimately, all relationships share the same root: they emerge from the structure of distinction, whether through sequence (cause and effect), non-linear resonance (synchronicity), or polarity (contrast). Look at anything. Perceive its meaning. Break it down into its components , the most obvious, then the parts within the parts. Fragment each part conceptually. You'll find that the structure remains relational, infinitely deep, with layers of interaction, contrast, and implication between forms. The deeper you go, the more you encounter dimensions of relational patterns, contrasts given meaning by their relative movement and interdependence ,ad infinitum.

The only way to trascend the suffering It's the understanding of the psychological dynamics that close us off. It's very complex because our biological programming drives us, and one of its most effective tools is suffering. Neo-Advaita shortcuts don't work; they're a trap. Our energetic structure has layers and layers of identification cemented by emotional energy. Neo-Advaita flattening is like putting a layer of plaster over those structures and thinking they're gone (you work in construction, so you understand). The only solution is to penetrate those structures, understand them, and deactivate their charge

If you want love you have to conquer the world. It's not easy. We are not is the kindergarten, this is the war, The sooner you realize this, the less frustration there will be. Society doesn't promote openness, but rather closure. If you want openness, you must fully understand social dynamics, adapt to them without internalizing them, and thus achieve inner freedom. It's not easy or simple work, and no one will care if you end up a frustrated, lonely addict with suicidal thoughts. You're on your own.

I love Osho, he's an actor who doesn't know the shame, who says absolutely silly obviousness, staring from 1,000 meters into space, while knowing perfectly well that he's laughing at you, and he laughs too. He's magnificent.

It's normal. Humans have programmed themselves to function as a hive entity in groups of millions of individuals. The most effective glue for cohesion is the fear of not fitting in, a kind of limiting narcissism that pushes you to act using the energy of your emotions. This limits your open life from which reality flows freely, and turns you into a closed soldier focused on a single point. It's necessary to sustain the structure necessary for the survival and evolution of a technological civilization of billions. If we were all absolutely open individuals flowing independently, the collapse would be brutal.

That difference is essential; it implies that you see the total as an evolutionary process. Although you later qualify it by saying that it is already perfect but aims for greater perfection, there is still a need for evolution. The absolute is not that; it is not on that plane. Movement occurs in the absolute. Imagine that the absolute is one of those gelatins inside a tube where bubbles appear, rising and intertwining. The absolute is the gelatin, the form is the bubbles. The gelatin cannot evolve; it is the gelatin, period. Potentially, all the possible bubbles are in the gelatin. A single bubble or a group can appear, fostering an interdimensional civilization encompassing millions of interconnected universes. The gelatin is exactly the same. And when that civilization goes "plop" and disappears as if it had never existed, the gelatin will be exactly the same. And if it forms a single, boring, isolated bubble, this will be its expression, exactly the same as the previous one, and its depth will be the same if you look through the limits: infinite. Intelligence is an arising in the totality. As it arises, it's infinite, but the absolute itself is not intelligent or dumb, it's just total. Let's see, intelligence by definition implies relationship, without relationship there is not intelligence except as potential. The absolute is "where" relationship happen, then it's not intelligent itself, it's where intelligence happens. Intelligence is just coherence. Relationship=logic=intelligence. Infinite relationship=infinite intelligence, just because the most coherent relation prevails God is just an arising. The absolute doesn't choose, it's inevitable, and the flow is inevitable, same than intelligence and what you call god. It's something that appears. Don't you see that choice is totally closed perspective? It's impossible by definition in an open frame. It's essential to see this to allow the real openess. It's not so difficult, just letting go all the limits. Choice exist, as an arising in the absolute. You could say that there are infinite choice, infinite intelligence, infinite conciousness, but as an arising that happens

The manifested reality is endless. It's completely impossible to grasp it in the sense of encompassing it with the mind, but it's easy to understand that if it has no end, it doesn't go anywhere; it flows on itself. This means that at a local level, it's constantly expanding, but from a complete perspective, it's beyond movement. Movement occurs within it, and you could say it's apparent, since it doesn't go anywhere; it only moves relative to itself. If you deeply contemplate the implications of limitlessness, you will see that reality is total by definition. Opening yourself to totality is enlightenment, btw. The total doesn't go anywhere; it's total, period. It sounds anticlimactic from a relative perspective, something like... so is the party over? I want more. That's when you are not in the total. If the total manifests, it's total. Any more is absolutely impossible. It's not conceivable, nor is it within the realm of relationship; it's the source of relationship. Evolution or movement is relationship, without a mirror there is no movement, that's the meaning of relative: that happens. The totality doesn't happen. Imagine that there is no movement. Try it seriously: everything is absolutely static, without change. It's exactly the same now than later. You can't realize there's no movement because realizing it would be movement. So, without movement, there's no consciousness. Conciousness concious of itself is a movement, without movement conciousness isn't concious of anything because there is not becoming. Of course there is always movement, because stillness is never, out of existence, because existence is movement. But the reality is not movement, but what is moving, and what is moving is the totality in infinite reflections that is the same that saying that movement is happening in the totality, outside and inside are the same. that is beyond consciousness, is where consciousness happens. It's not someone of something, not a mind or God, it's just the total. 5 minutes ago I was opened to it and it was absolutely obvious, 5 minutes later I was closed to it and I don't remember what it was, it's impossible, it's not thinkable, even remotely, it's another plane of being, it's not the plane of the becoming, the becoming is limits, the total is absence of limits. If you place yourself in the plane of the limitless the form is irrelevant. Even being concious or unconscious is irrelevant. You always are the totality, the unlimited. I'm intrigued to know better what you mean here. Could you explain it to me? If you define reality as something, whether consciousness, emptiness, life, intelligence, expansion, or love, you are limiting it to that definition then your frame is closed. Reality cannot be defined, but consciousness, emptiness, intelligence, and love occur in reality. And if they do, they are infinite, since there is no origin, only flow within itself. Conciousness is flow that happens is the reality, that is an open frame. If you want to realize what it is, you have to open yourself totally, become the openess. You can't get it with the mind, you have to be open to it. A strange thing to realize is that existing and not existing are basically the same. Even if you don't exist as a form or a structure (that is, exist ) you are still the unlimited not manifested. It's twisted to see this, because at the same time, we are also existence. Maybe this affirmation iis too twisted

Believing that you can change the frequency of your thoughts with your will is a mistake. Your thoughts are the manifestation of your structure. If you want to change them, change your structure.

Mental castration only works until uncle Vlad comes with his sticks to play with you and your family. Then it's all complaints.

It's an absolutely essential difference. Consciousness or perception is something that inevitably arises within an unlimited framework; therefore, it is, in turn, unlimited and never originated, but that doesn't define reality. That idea is very strange; I don't understand how it can be defended without seeing the contradiction it implies. If reality is consciousness, then form is consciousness dreaming forms. Therefore, consciousness is, in addition to consciousness, the creator of dreams. And what is a dream? Another limiting definition, one that opposes reality and lacks any logic. Then they would say: you have to awake to the fact of reality is conciousness. What is awake? Realize something? Maybe you could awake to the fact that Putin is spying on you to put polonium in your coffee

@kbone Imitation 1 of Huang Po: he says that Ultimate reality is infinite mind. This implies movement and relationship. Ultimate reality is the limitlessness that inevitably gives rise to infinite relationship, or infinite mind. Ultimate reality is unthinkable; it is the absence of limits, which translates into totality. Infinite mind implies creation; infinite creation is an inevitable consequence, not fundamental reality. 2: The final state, enlightenment, is the absence of identification, giving rise to a tranquil peace in which there is no conceptualization or seeking. Absolutely limited, closed. His enlightenment lacks real openness; it is repressive; it excludes conceptualization as a mental error, when conceptualization is a creation of reality, like anything else. It closes itself off from a true understanding of the nature of form, its depth and vitality. He does not understand the true human potential and castrates an entire human facet in favor of another, better according to him, which is peace, emptiness and stillness. 3 He says that the seeker must stop seeking, realize that seeking leads nowhere, and deactivate the mind. Doing this is precisely what has locked him into the duality of emptiness/fullness in favor of emptiness as the ultimate nature. Emptiness and form are exactly the same in terms of their level of reality, as are stillness and noise. This preference, disguised as non-preference, closes off the true nature of Source for him, and he remains in a tranquil limbo he calls absence of suffering and final realization. About Heraclitus, i think that as a philosopher he is the one who presents a cleaner framework, not closed. Anyway for him reality is flow, flow is consequence, I think it's essential to see that nuance

All of this is indisputable, and as you say in another post, logic leads to truth. This is because existence is logic. Logic means relationship. What is relationally coherent exists. But there is another plane of reality: nonexistence is simply unmanifested potential because it is not coherent with the whole. Any existence is relative movement, since in an unlimited framework there is no movement except with respect to a reference. From this it follows that any existence is stable, synchronous relative movement. From any relationship, infinite relationships are derived in infinite dimensions. This is the unthinkable totality of existence. But existence is manifestation; it is not ultimate reality. Existence has an opposite: nonexistence, which is simply the absence of relative motion. That it does not exist does not imply that it is not "real" as a concept. Understanding this is essential because it leads to the ultimate essence, the reality from which existence emanates. Reality is not logic; it is the source of logic or relationship. The conceptual framework you are developing is impeccable because it is absolutely logical, and that creates a viable conceptual structure for openness. Openness is not in the realm of logic, but limited logic closes.