snowyowl

@Yonkon thanks for sharing, that's some great progress, you're taking ownership and developing your intuition too

We're getting close to the deadline at the end of December and a trade deal is still proving difficult. My views on Brexit were pretty close to the referendum result; some good arguments on both sides with a few % in favour of leaving. I felt at the time, and still do, that there will be short to medium term problems with adjusting. but in the long term we (the UK) will have a better relationship with the EU. Because the EU has been moving slowly towards "ever closer union" (as I think it's constitution says) ie United States of Europe, which has been resisted here by a small majority. When we're properly out, that project can build up steam, the EU can fully integrate, and both sides can carry on negotiating until we finally get over this squabble and have a trading relationship which benefits the capitalist system on both sides. I also believe Joe Biden will have bigger problems to deal with than refuse a treaty and create a trade war with us. Oh, and on a lighter note, I’m looking forward to seeing imperial measures again, even if alongside metric, because the drift to metric is so anti-diversity! I'm wasting my time here converting everything back to inches and pounds.

I think we're just disagreeing over different definitions of ego. @electroBeam "Not only does an ego not exist, but you've never known what an ego truly is." That seems to say you think ego is an undefined word. But I do know what my ego is (on my terms) and felt it in my consciousness. My ego is my mind creating division and attachment. For example, I own a car, it is inside the circle of "me" compared to everyone else's cars, I am attached to it, so I'll feel upset if it's stolen, but less bothered if a stranger's car is stolen. @Moksha "The ego never exists. It is just a name we give for the state of unconsciousness, and the gravitational pull of our conditioning to staying in that state." You say the ego doesn't exist, then give a perfectly good definition of just what it is. So, I'll say an ego is a construct of feeling and thought, perhaps not very enlightened thought, but to say it doesn't exist is like saying a house doesn't exist, it's just a collection of bricks. Like the Buddhist analogy of a chariot not existing apart from its component parts. Hopefully we can agree that egos don't exist separately, don't have inherent existence. I'm just using ego as a label for a certain pattern within my mind.

Yes I agree, except that calling it "the now", "the here and now", "the present moment" etc is in the language of time and space, it assumes that "now" is a moment in a timeline from past to future. Or here is a point in space distinct from over there. Inevitable I suppose as that's how we're brought up to think. So I'm trying to wean myself off calling it Now, and opting for an alternative, like being, etc.

@Swarnim Not for nothing did the ancients believe that love is a gift of the Gods. If you desire love for your own self, you'll not get it. "Give and ye shall receive", love others first, give away your love to those in need, shine like the Sun and you'll be embodying it already. Compassion and empathy is the way.

@Forestluv yes open minded exploration free from fixed narratives and fixed dualities is the way to go As a provisional view, I see selves existing as temporary constructs of mind, tools of the mind, being born and dying moment by moment.

How about truth? If your statement is neither right nor wrong, what does it mean? Or is there a distinction here between absolute and relative truth? I dunno if my line of thinking is even capable of creating a proper insight, maybe I should just shut up and contemplate it first before mouthing off

@Forestluv yeah, it can lead to selfish competition in some situations, eg fear-driven survival mode. Also, as it's an imaginary line, it can be drawn wherever you like: my family, my community, my nation. But you're right that division easily leads to conflict. However, this body/mind exists and while I want it to continue, I need a self-identity don't I?

I get that "I don't exist" in the sense of having a little homunculus inside my mind who is the centre and controller, like the driver of a car. However, what's wrong with drawing an (imaginary) line round the edge of my skin, and calling what's inside "me", as a whole entity? I can move around, think and act independently of other "mes" after all. Corollary. What do you think about the executive function? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_functions This could be a scientific theory for our sense of self, and it's possibly located in the frontal cortex, which is approximately where I feel like "I am". Maybe something in the brain needs to organise the other functions to keep the whole system working efficiently, like the CPU in a computer.

Could be propaganda from the Chinese government who have been persecuting Falun Gong for years - just read their wikipedia page https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falun_Gong you need to read between the lines with internet opinions.

@Beginner Mind yeah, I kind of get this, it's not free will as in "I am the boss of my life". More like developing the intuition to feel what is coming through to my limited form, from the infinite source.

yeah, like hedonistic happiness = conditional, impermanent; and deep happiness = unconditional, timeless. But when we start on this path, all we know is hedonism and can't imagine what unconditional happiness or love is like, being content whatever the external circumstances. Like, we think nirvana means going to heaven where's there's no challenges, but in reality it means keeping equanimity in the middle of challenges.

@Beginner Mind Thanks! But isn't it an illusion to think that I am doing a spiritual practice when in fact, I'm not in control anyway, everything is 'just happening'. What difference does it make to believe I'm on a path to awakening, perhaps I should let go of that belief too

My sense is this is what it looks like after awakening; but before, things aren't all ok, life is a mixture. So I'd say you're on a good path

I get this idea, and practice in the form of acceptance /letting be. But, a question arises, that "I" am not the instigator of all the drama. Resistance arises by itself (along with everything else), so shouldn't I be accepting the resistance energy too rather than picking and choosing what to surrender to? If I give space to everything which appears in my mind, I find it a smoother route to tranquillity.

@Shunyata hi, no I've not listened to any, is that what Shunyamurti calls it? It's just related to my username, I like owls

My issue with this is, calling it "now" or the "present moment", "here and now" etc implies it exists as a moment in the succession of time, alongside other slices of time. I think the Abhidhamma in Theravada Buddhism goes into this - eg how long is a "moment". Not a criticism as such, but a reminder to check thoughts like this - "now" in this sense means everything not just a snapshot.

@Cosmin_Visan beware of presuming other people's motives without knowing their mind. If people are expressing their authentic level of understanding that's perfect and what the forum is for.

Which spiritual people say that? IMO language is an abstraction, a map, a very useful one at that. The delusion part is when you mistake the map for the territory, the abstraction for the actuality. There's no superior/inferior when we compare humans vs animals, we are all evolved to be good at 'doing our thing'. An eagle can't think like us but it can fly by itself and has got better eyesight than me Edit - Really there's no distinction anyway, humans are a type of animal, otherwise we start to think we're separate from nature.

Remember in school when the teacher explained something, or you read it in a book, then you had to explain it in your own words. Yes there is a bit of group speak here - as anywhere else - but I reckon most folks here are aware of the need to get there ourselves, that's the whole point.

Welcome to the forum Connor, good to see you here! You know how to make an entrance - but now the real work can continue

Yes I'd agree. There's lots of names for "it", none of which capture "it" precisely, so tolerance and open mindedness is key.

"Consciousness is made of matter" = materialist paradigm. "Matter is made of consciousness" = idealist paradigm. A strange loop? When you collapse the duality of consciousness and matter, what's it called? A philosophical name is the "neutral monad" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutral_monism although it's a slightly awkward name. So I prefer to call it being, love, suchness or even (on a good day) God instead.

@Denys I don't have an easy answer but I've been contemplating Nothing and Everything for the last couple of days. My sense is that nothing doesn't become something (or the multitude of things in the universe = "everything"). Rather, nothing and everything are identical to begin with. Another thought, we can't really think of nothing; trying to hold nothingness as a thought, a concept, means there's something there in our minds rather than true nothingness, which is a complete absence of thought. So it's a paradox. Also, "everything" is a paradox. To think about everything, you also need to include yourself, the thinker, so you need to encompass both the subject (the thinker) and object (the thought). The thinker needs to think itself, it's a strange loop. Or, you need to collapse the duality of thing/nothing existence/non-existence.

Ok, but this will be seen relatively depending on your understanding of God. Most folks are SD blue or orange, so will read a return to God as going back to the traditional religions which we've already had for millennia, without solving the problems of hunger and poverty. Even fundamentalists and radicals would agree with the basic statement. You may have covered this in your deleted post - don't you just hate it when that happens . So how do we give 'God' (aka religion or spirituality) a nudge up the development scale to help humanity progress?