Hyperion

As a spiritual seeker, you may have heard many teachers say that spiritual awakening is the end of the personal self. While such claims have undeniable relative value/validity and can serve as effective pointers towards the realization of Absolute Truth (aka. spiritual awakening), it is important to keep in mind that all such statements regarding the "true nature of reality" (and the recognition thereof) can by definition only ever be relatively true, but never absolutely true. To appreciate why this is the case, it is necessary to understand what the word "Absolute" refers to: The Absolute is the infinite field of reality which includes and gives rise to all possible qualities; every quality that there is (and could be) is a relative aspect of that which is Absolute, meaning that anything that you can name, think of and experience is it - and also, it's not it. As outlined in my little "theory" above, consciousness must constantly oscillate between contrasting qualitative states, for without such oscillation the experience of reality would not be possible. (An experience = a relative quality or set of qualities that "stands out" from the infinite sum total of all qualities and thereby comes into existence). This is why all polarities such as "self/no-self", "personal/impersonal", "limited/unlimited" etc. essentially represent two (relative) sides of the same (absolute) coin, since they can only exist and be experienced in relation and contrast to each other. Where there is no Yin, there can be no Yang... and vice versa. However, once (your) consciousness enters a high-frequency meta-state where all seeming opposites are recognized as equally valid facets and expressions of the same infinite Reality, there is now a sort of simultaneous meta-experience of self and no-self, personal and impersonal, limited and unlimited and all other complementary opposite aspects of the Absolute. So in one sense, all of these relative aspects/perspectives are still "online" and fully available to you; and in another sense, they simply cease to have any meaningful significance since all conceptual definitions are now seen to be nothing but mere arbitrary labels. When the pendulum of consciousness swings so fast that contrasting qualities are being experienced simultaneously (as it were), they essentially merge together and neutralize each other... and what remains is the ineffable Divine that contains and transcends absolutely everything and is impossible to speak of. So while it is true that upon awakening there is no more solid sense of self, there is also no solid sense of no-self once you have truly passed through the proverbial gateless gate. Seemingly conflicting statements such as "I exist as a person" and "I don't exist as a person" are now just as equally meaningful/meaningless to you as all other verbal utterances (aka. relative perspectives); you may still emphasize one aspect over the other in order to make a spiritual, philosophical or ethical point(er), but there will be no more dogged attachment to either side of the all-encompassing Coin. Depersonalisation on the other hand signifies being (often involuntarily) attached to and stuck in a specific relative perspective; it means that there has been a shift from personhood to non-personhood, and now the latter perspective is being mistaken for absolute truth and thereby made into an (egoic) identity. (If it sounds strange and unbelievable to you that it should be possible to construct an identity that is based on the tenet of "I don't exist", then you really don't know just how enduring, clever and creative the egoic mind is... trust me, it can make an identity out of ANYTHING, lol). To be clear: For some people, temporary depersonalization may in fact be a necessary phase or stage of their awakening journey; it may just be the appropriate antidote that will over time cure them from their attachment to "being someone", so none of this is meant to be an indictment that points out some kind of shortcoming or character flaw on your or someone else's part. All I am saying is that it is beneficial to see things for what they are(n't) and that there is no need to overly indulge in and willfully prolong such transitory phases. After all, the point of awakening is not to trade in one attachment-based identity for another, but rather to transcend all identity and fully thrust yourself into the great unknown which is quite literally beyond description. But then again, in case you prefer to foster your depersonalisation and milk it to the very last drop, then by all means... depersonalize away.

@Natasha Tori Maru Gotcha. 😘 @Carl-Richard It is always hilarious to see how caught up people get in their labels, concepts and perspectives... when the solution to the whole conundrum is so incredibly simple. You only need to ask yourself the following question: Does that which I am referring to when I use word (or phrase) X have an opposite? If the answer is yes, then it is relative. If the answer is no, then it is Absolute. Simple as that. 🕉

I'd say that's relative.

I guess that's why I've had such a itchy feeling down there for the past couple of days. @Natasha Tori Maru Arguing about whether there is a self or not is like debating whether spaghetti are pasta or noodles... potentially entertaining, but ultimately pointless.

It's actually much much much much much much simpler than that: That which has an opposite is relative. That which doesn't have an opposite is Absolute. You're welcome.

It's like asking: "Why has there got to be pizza? Why not just slices of pizza?"

That's relatively (un)true.

Beware of rigid belief systems that try to put reality into a neat little box by de-fining (I.e. limiting) it as "only this, but not that". Infinite Reality isn't ever this OR that... it is always this AND that, and also it is neither. Anything that can be expressed with words is a relative perspective, and any relative perspective that you become attached to turns into dogma. And once you mistake your dogmas for absolute truth, you are lost in delusion. ☯️

Your mom, at least according to what she told me last night in private. (Sorry, couldn't resist.) 😘

The following is my attempt to formulate a "theory of everything" that is as short and concise as possible and doesn't contain any kind of unnecessary fluff. I hope you have fun with it... and please keep in mind that this is only a conceptual model which, just like any model, is nothing but a necessarily incomplete and ultimately inadequate abstraction. Enjoy. --- The Absolute is the totality of Being. It has no specific quality, as it is the origin, the sum, and the essence - or field - of all possible qualities. Therefore, the Absolute cannot be directly experienced; an experience is always the experience of something definable, i.e. of something that possesses a concrete quality. In other words: Reality is only ever partially perceivable, experienceable and cognizable, but never as a complete whole. Consciousness or experience of reality is therefore only possible where the Absolute seemingly splits up into several parts and establishes contrasting relations between them; it is the contrast between these different parts (or states) that gives them their specific qualities and thus makes them experienceable. Relativity is thus a necessary condition of existence: No relations -> no contrast -> no qualities -> no experience / cognition of reality. In order to perceive itself, the consciousness of the whole, which can only ever be experientially aware of specific parts or aspects of itself, must constantly alternate between contrasting qualitative states; therefore, no state can ever be permanent. However, a state can appear more or less permanent if the speed or vibrational frequency with which consciousness shifts between contrasting states is accordingly low (-> one-sided fixation, relative stagnation, seeming incompleteness / fragmentation, suffering). But the higher the frequency, the more consciousness approaches a holistic experience of total reality where contrasting qualitative states seem to be experienced simultaneously (-> unification and integration of all opposites, 'spiritual awakening", "enlightenment"). This is the essence of all spirituality. --- Due to popular request, here is a more easy-to-understand analogy (which I originally posted below) that illustrates what I am talking about in the text above: This is the famous Yin Yang symbol, which I am sure you are familiar with. Now, here's a question for you: Is this symbol white, or is it black? It's obviously both, right? So the symbol possesses / represents not only one specific quality, but two: Whiteness and blackness. Now imagine a thing which has not only two qualities but literally every single quality that there could possibly be, including the quality of not having any quality whatsoever. This "thing" - which is no-thing as well as everything - is the Absolute aka. All of Reality. This no-thing / everything cannot be experienced directly, since it is impossible to experience every possible quality that there is all at once. So what does it do in order to be able to experience itself? It splits itself up into infinite parts, each of which represents and embodies a specific quality (just as Yin represents blackness and Yang represents whiteness), and then it lines them all up in space and time so that it can experience them one by one. Now, when it moves its awareness very slowly from part to part (so to speak), then each quality that is being experienced in the moment is being experienced for a pretty long time; and the longer it takes for a certain quality (or part of reality) to be experienced, the more dense, solid, sticky and permanent it seems... even though no experience can ever be permanent (since an experience can only exist in contrast to another experience, just as Yin can only exist in contrast to Yang.) Now, go back and take another look at the Yin Yang symbol. Imagine that you could never see (experience) the whole symbol all at once, but only one part at a time. Imagine that there is a switch in front of you that you can flip either to the left or to the right; and depending on which side you flip the switch, you see either the Yin part (black) or the Yang part (white) appearing on the screen. (Remember: You can never see them both at the same time.) - So, the only way for you to get an idea of what it would be like to see the full symbol all at once is to flip the switch back and forth as fast as possible; and the faster you flip it back and forth, the more it will seem like you are looking at the whole symbol (while at the same time the two contrasting parts will seem less and less dense and solid.) This is basically what spirituality is about. It's about learning to flip the switch as fast as possible (by whatever means necessary) in order to "perceive the Absolute" - which you never fully do, but you can get closer and closer and closer and closer to it... unto infinity. Because that's literally what the Absolute is: Infinity aka. All there is. Hope that helps.

ᚠᛇᚹ✨

Great. Not to (overly) toot my own horn, but I suggest you read my previous three threads over and over and over again until they really land... I am not saying that my grandiloquent ramblings are necessarily the be-all end-all of spiritual wisdom, but perhaps they'll do the trick and disimbue you of the kind of sloppy, deceptive, half-baked, self-contradictory dogmatic nondualistic horseshit that mostly passes for spiritual teaching these days. All of that popular Advaita slop might serve as a valuable pointer in the beginning, but if you don't let go of it and transcend it at some point, you'll probably end up more lost and deluded than the most duality-driven egomaniac out there. Just my two cents, of course. Make of it what you will. 😌

You're kidding, right? Feel free to re-read my "What Are Illusions" thread (as well as my theory of everything while you're at it) where I explain at length why illusions are in fact the only things that exist. Sorry, but I really don't know how to make it any more clear than that.

Good insight, especially the 'belief' part. Solipsism is a valid relative perspective, but so is the opposite point of view. "Enlightenment" is about seeing relative perspectives for what they really are (and recognizing that which is the source/sum/essence of all relative things); living a good life is about discerning between helpful/healthy and unhelpful/unhealthy perspectives. And as far as helpful & healthy perspectives go, solipsism is pretty damn near the very bottom of the list.

A valid counterperspective. 🙏

In my conversations with spiritual seekers (as well as those who claim to have stopped seeking), it has become increasingly clear to me that one of the main things that trips people up on the spiritual path is the all too common inability to distinguish between paradox and contradiction. The difference between paradox and contradiction is often quite subtle (and therefore easy to miss) but nevertheless important, since being able to tell the difference between the two essentially equates to being able to distinguish mature spiritual insight from half-baked baloney. Once you have truly internalized it, the ability to tell them apart becomes a rather effective BS-detector that will save you considerable amounts of time, doubt and confusion and show you where you may (still) be attached to certain one-sided views / beliefs and stuck in delusion... so, proceed to read at your own risk, and don't say I didn't warn you. From Wikipedia: A paradox [...] is a statement that, despite apparently valid reasoning from true or apparently true premises, leads to a seemingly self-contradictory or a logically unacceptable conclusion. A paradox usually involves contradictory-yet-interrelated elements that exist simultaneously and persist over time. They result in "persistent contradiction between interdependent elements" leading to a lasting "unity of opposites". In other words: A paradox is a statement or (meta)perspective which implies that two opposite aspects of a thing are equally (in)valid. The statement "less is more" is paradoxical because it equates two opposite qualities which seem to be mutually exclusive; the statement "this statement is false" is paradoxical because it leads to the inevitable conclusion that the statement itself is simultaneously true AND false - and also, it is neither. Here is why this is important: Reality is fundamentally paradoxical. Anything that can be expressed with words is always and without exception a relative perspective; and for any one relative perspective, there is always an opposite and complementary counter-perspective which, from an absolute standpoint, is equally valid - or invalid, depending on how you look at it. (Before you accuse me of reckless relativism, let me point out that the statement "all perspectives are equally (in)valid" is itself a relative perspective and therefore cannot be absolutized. You're welcome.) Paradoxical statements therefore point to a higher order of truth where seeming opposites are seen and recognized as two sides of the same coin that complement and imply each other; they are seen to be different (relative) aspects of the same (absolute) thing/no-thing/everything. Examples of such statements are: "Reality is dual AND nondual", "I am a person AND I am not a person", "appearance is real AND illusory", "time exists AND doesn't exist", "there are other people AND there are no other people". (Again: You may agree or disagree that the opposite perspective in each of these examples is equally valid as its counterpart, but the fact of the matter is that they complement and imply each other by their very existence; one perspective simply cannot exist without the other, just as there cannot be high without low, light without dark, positive without negative etc.) So, how is a contradiction different from a paradox? A contradiction is when you assume and express a one-sided perspective (that essentially denies and invalidates the complementary opposite perspective); and then, you express a second (relatively unrelated) one-sided perspective that invalidates the first one. So instead of acknowledging two opposite sides of the one coin, you acknowledge only one side and then say something else which contradicts that. Examples: "Reality is nondual AND cannot be labeled or described", "all is one AND all is nothing", "there is appearance AND there is no duality", "there is no time AND everything is impermanent", "you are God AND you don't exist", "there are no others AND most people are lost in the dream", "there is nothing but awakeness AND there is noone to awaken" --- the classic (Neo) Advaita contradictions. Again: The difference between paradox and contradiction can be very subtle and easy to miss; but with enough practice (and insight), it will become more and more easy for you to immediately and intuitively tell them apart. So keep sharpening your sword, fellow Samurai, until you can cut right through the drivel. Tl;dr: A paradox is a trans-logical metaperspective that points to a higher truth; a contradiction is an illogical fallacy that indicates attachment to an inconsistent belief system. Having said all that, please feel free to contradict what I just wrote.

Illusion. This is one of those words which are being thrown around in spiritual circles like they're confetti, and yet very few people seem to understand what the word actually refers to. So, let's analyze the confetti so that we can see it for what it really is(n't). Here's what an illusion is NOT: It's not something that isn't real. It's not something that doesn't exist. It's not a hallucination that is being "dreamed up" by some mysterious invisible being. Here's what an illusion IS: It is an incomplete perception (which is a tautology, since all perception is necessarily incomplete). It is a relative perspective (as opposed to absolute truth). It is a part of reality (as opposed to ALL of reality). Here's an analogy: When we see a magician standing on a stage and performing a magic trick, why do we call that magic trick an illusion? Is it because there is no magician, no white rabbit and no hat that the rabbit is being pulled out of? NOPE. We call it an illusion because we are only seeing part of what is actually happening; we see a real magician pulling a real rabbit out of a real hat, but what we don't see is all of the stuff that is going on behind the scenes - all of the things that have been carefully hidden from our view so that we can be amazed and surprised by the things that we do see happening on stage; and since we are missing the full picture, it appears to us like magic. Does this mean that the illusion is "bad"? No, it doesn't. Not only is the existence of illusions not bad, but in fact it is a necessary condition for reality being able to experience/be aware of itself, since reality can only ever be partially perceived and experienced, but never as a 100% complete whole. No illusions = no experience of reality. Here are examples of things that are illusions: The black letters appearing on a white screen that you are seeing now are an illusion. The thought "those black letters appearing on a white screen are just an illusion" is an illusion. The notion that there is something rather than nothing is an illusion. The notion that there is nothing rather than something is an illusion. The notion that reality is physical is an illusion. The notion that reality is a dream is an illusion. The notion that you are human is an illusion. The notion that you are not human is an illusion. The notion that you are consciousness is an illusion. The notion that you are not consciousness is an illusion. Duality is an illusion. Nonduality is an illusion. Oneness is an illusion. Multiplicity is an illusion. Solipsism is an illusion. Time is an illusion. Timelessness is an illusion. Form is an illusion. Formlessness is an illusion. Free will is an illusion. No free will is an illusion. Meaning is an illusion. Meaninglessness is an illusion. Self is an illusion. No-self is an illusion. Anything that can be perceived, experienced and be expressed with words is an illusion. Again: An illusion is NOT something that doesn't exist. An illusion is a part of reality that "stands out" (in your awareness) from the rest of reality. So not only do illusions exist, but as a matter of fact, ILLUSIONS ARE THE ONLY THING(S) THAT EXIST. That which does not exist - which doesn't "stand out" - is the Absolute, which is no-thing aka. everything. --- All of what you just read is an illusion (-> a relative perspective). And all of what you are going to reply will also be an illusion. Now, are you going to cling to one illusion and reject the other, or are you going to be aware of that which holds, encompasses, expresses itself as and transcends all illusions? Your choice.

Whatever you are conscious of is what you experience. Whatever you experience is a part of reality. Whatever is a part of reality is an aspect of the Absolute. Being conscious of something = the Absolute looking at itself from a certain perspective. (This is the function of the ego btw. No ego = no consciousness / experience of reality.) So yes, whatever you experience is relatively true. That which is absolutely true is the source, the sum and the essence of all possible relative truths. You're welcome.

Letting go ≠ getting rid of. If you drop a bag of bricks it will fall to the ground, but it is still going to be there. So, just let the anger be there. Don't resist it. Feel it fully. Feel it in all of its raw, amazing, ineffable power. Don't look at it as something that "shouldn't be there"; rather perceive it as an impersonal force of nature that is simply rising to the surface and discharging itself in the present moment, like an electric current that is flowing through your body. It only gets stuck in your body (and your mind) when you try to repress it; if on the other hand you just let it be there, allow it to wash over you and discharge itself, it will eventually run its course and fade away. Does this mean that you need to act on it? No, it doesn't. This is where the art of nondoership comes into play... just feel whatever you feel and stay as outwardly calm as possible in the situation. Express whatever needs to be expressed, but do it in a way that is constructive rather than destructive. Easier said than done? You bet your ass it is. But life just wouldn't be fun without some epic challenges. Good luck.

Nothing, which is exactly why I don't rely on it. Why not, indeed? As long as it still feels like "work", there hasn't been a true breakthrough. The real magic happens where the real work stops.

...which is why it has been said: Tao called Tao is not Tao. Names can name no lasting name. Nameless: the origin of heaven and earth. Naming: the mother of ten thousand things. Empty of desire, perceive mystery. Filled with desire, perceive manifestations. These have the same source, but different names. Call them both deep - Deep and again deep: The gateway to all mystery. I would say that it is a function of high-frequency multi-perspectival meta-awareness that leads to a unification and integration of opposites. Which, for the purpose of brevity and catchiness, is more commonly referred as "enlightenment".

Read the OP. It's all in there.