RMQualtrough

It's located nowhere, it's not inside space. The vessel through which experience takes place is located in space just as it is in a dream. But the experience itself is not. If awareness is nothing there can't possibly be any boundary because you can't divide nothing. And therefore awareness is singular. The mind is like the camcorder lens awareness is looking through which is your mind. Your mind likes to believe it owns the awareness.

Rupert Spira is the best for actual debate, he has a good way of tailoring his metaphors and ideas to the other person's belief system. Actual truth can't be wrong so it can only be destroyed if the person's understanding of the truth is incorrect, or if they are just bad at debating and lose via that silliness. I say silliness because debate clubs make members debate for things they don't believe in, and win... If you can win a debate with a lie because you're a better debater, the setup is obv trash.

Well Christians and materialists face the same infinite regress where it leaves questions forever no matter how deep you go. Why is there a quark and not infinite nothingness? Replace quark with the God of the Bible and you see it's the same issue. Matter never being created btw, I think just applies to the laws inside the universe. Nothingness cannot ever be separated from somethingness, because only things can be finite and limited. If nothing exists, neither do limitations of any kind, so boom infinity.

It's not just your subconscious. Your mind including the subconscious elements are appearances inside of "it". You don't have control over an infinity. Analogous to a dream, you're the character in the dream and there's a landscape around you. Both are unreal and are just the dreamer's mind. Well this is the same setup except the dreamer isn't a thing or deity etc it's just an infinity.

It can't exist. I'm very naturally a naive realist so it is very easy for me to lose grasp of these things and on some days I lose clarity. You simply could not ever describe any external "thing" as a thing without assigning it a property reliant upon some sort of perception. E.g. you can't imagine a red apple actually out there as red, round, and smooth, because you are envisioning sight and touch. There is no seen without see'er and no feel without feeler. You see how that is not possible? Any way you could imagine something existing out there, you're imagining in perceptions which can't exist independently. When you take away these qualitative imagined elements you find you can ONLY describe things in terms of sheer math (which itself is not a material object) or abstract concepts... Immaterial properties like charge, spin. There is never any "object" you could describe to be out there... You also aren't getting what is meant by "you are imagining it". Your self-mind is not the thing doing the imagining, IT is imagining your self mind and the universe and every other self mind, etc. As such you do not have control to where if you have delusional beliefs they become true because you believe. Like believing you can fly.

I feel like the "big bang" was every moment from the start to end of the universe being stretched out into the illusion of space and time. Experience cannot take place without space (to allow for division, the appearance of duality: subject and object seeming to occupy two separate slots), and without time, this space ends at its beginning and thus cancels out. It needs to appear to have time for moments to be experienced.

Do you not literally see that as long as a person searches for things there must come a point where you ask "what are those made of?" and you say "they're not made of anything". Or "they're made of themselves" in which case "where did they come from?" and answer "they didn't come from anywhere". Do you see that inevitability? This is where all things lead, like the Abrahamic forms of God. There's no real difference except we feel smart to find tiny things.

So? I haven't yet seen or understood anything in any scientific study that has ever encroached upon the nature of what things fundamentally are... We just break things down smaller and smaller, atoms, quarks, and just keep digging deeper. With "things" there will never be a point where the very nature of the thing will be revealed by the thing. Eventually nothingness must be accepted.

My mom died of cancer when I was 14 and my nan has raised me until now, I'm 28 now. My nan has 2 weeks to live, she has cancer all through her body, she's been told essentially she can either come home to die or die in a hospice, which is up to her.

As per the title. Please help.

Yes, I feel like Leo is doing very well mentally lately, when seeing these videos he is coming across as genuinely happy. It's nice to see. He might have had some kind of breakthrough recently, different vibes.

Has Rogan actually used DMT properly? His talk about seeing monkeys then being beamed up to a mothership, it's really nothing like what I or any friend or any trip report describes. Apart from aliens. He also described just visuals on 5-MeO-DMT when he spoke to Tyson. Has he ever mentioned out of body ego death etc?

Watched this live earlier. There was a part when discussing how Curt is loved no matter what where both of you seemed near crying. Haven't seen him like that before. Way better than part one I think. Leo seems really happy lately. Good talk and enjoyable episode. Made it to 5 hours which is usually difficult, but the chatter was enjoyable as Leo was in a rather playful mood. Not sure when it will be uploaded officially.

I have been shocked to find so many people don't give a single fuck. They'd be about as interested in a definitive answer to reality as they are in the scores of a sports game.

I think the symbol represents nonduality perfectly. The contrast of black and white shows that there can only be form with formless (no teardrop shape would be seen if the entire circle was white). The two sides represent formless and form, and their inseperable union. It's a perfect symbol.