Dodo

Happy Birthday Leo! A lot has changed..And Natasha, she was a real one. I miss her a lot. The only reason I know your birthday is today is her thoughtful post here from years ago. Im not as thoughtful as her, but reality made sure I had a sync event to see this just hours ago. I hope you have a great one and keep being you! (Hehe, as if you had a choice!)

I think I know why its happening, though. Might be wrong, but to me it seems like he believes if you are not a solipsist yourself and saying solipsism is right, that means you are just the image, basic npc, and not actually consciousness/being. In one breath he says he is me, but the next moment, when he realises I am not a solipsist, he believes that he is not actually speaking to himself anymore (the one/0 consciousness), but to an image/npc that needs to be a solipsist to really be the True Self. If you believe you are Solipsist and solipsism is absolute truth, then anyone who is not solipsist is immediately seen (perhaps unconsciously) as Other and therefore you are talking to the figment of your imagination and telling it it needs to do the work, become a solipsist itself, and only then you can consider it as Being. Then only another solipsist, can really be seen as the self that you are, because you take the position that solipsism is Truth. I am just "thinking out loud" here. I also have images of you in my mind obviously and I can get people wrong for sure. But I also know you are the Self/Noself 1consciosness/0consciousness aka being / isness, no matter what philosophical or epistemological position you take. So you are That "me" regardless, no matter how much I disagree with the image I have of you that is constructed in my mind. I don't know if that makes sense to you, but it makes sense to me. I also don't like circlejerking, I am not commenting this to gang up on Razard, I am genuinly interested in these things and exploring them. Its kind of a hard topic to talk about. Solipsism might be subjectively true, but Absolute Truth...that's Being. Hence the title non-ipsism. Being is not Solo, it just Is. Self shining. Being is not 2, but it's also not 1. Tldr: Being is prior to duality and oneness

You've all heard of solipsism and many in forum actively defend solipsism as truth. Why solo? We might be on the same boat that there is only 1 consciousness (even if there are many minds). But it is 1 consciousness, because it is literally Emptiness, or Nothingness, or 0, so you cant really talk about it beginning, ending, or dividing it. So the correct term then should not be Solipsism if you believe in that 1 consciousness, it makes much more sense to call it Nonipsism. Not one entity that dreams it all, which is what the word Solipsism implies. Consciousness is literally no one, we can't talk about Solipsism, if there is no Solo. Solipsism is the ego running away with truth, in my personal point of view.

So your function is to judge others based on your perception of them, and to spoil the end of the movie, that is not helpful. You need to read this. I have been here for a very long time, and you have no clue what work I've done or haven't done. You have no idea what I know and don't know. You have a drawing of me in your mind, you are assuming everything about me. Really try to notice it. But read the post in that thread linked, you will see some important stuff there. You might even see yourself being described, if you are honest while reading.

Sounds like completely different Razard. Man i like that guy. Entire post, not just underlined.

No, im playing chess and you think we're playing checkers. Not my bad. I don't deny you had a deep awakening experience. I'm not denying your experience in any way by disagreeing with you or your comments. You don't have anything of value to offer me at the current time, because you dont even attempt to grasp my position. I don't feel like I missed any shot. Please look up Zen Devilry for further information. I'll help you out.

Sorry Davino, but they told me once I am immune to zen devilry, and I'm running with that. If you scroll past all the circlejerk you and Razard could have had in private messages you can easily get to my last post with substance. But you will also need to hear Leo's video, because Lord Knows, if I say it its wrong, but if He says it its right. I have set timestamps of the juicy bits.

I can easily see that both of you are constructing some persona around solipsism as the final attainment aka Enlightenment and that you have arrived. I'm here to suggest you both don't know who you are. Look at the experience of deep sleep to get a less dramatic answer to the question who you are. Truth is not about appearing grandiose.

Its good to know you perceive that Razard is right now going through a solipsistic awakening and is having a difficult emotional time, as you keep replying. The way I see it is that he is some sort of solipsistic guru here to tell everyone what they are missing if they don't fall in the same spiritual trap as him, but you know better, since you are also there.

Have you tried semen retention

This is not a Solipsism debate. This as Non-ipsism debate. You obviously experienced something else, that this thread is not about. There was a self there that was suffering something. I am not asking about such an experience. You and Razard can hide your comments if you like, and I will hide my comments replying to them, as to not fill the thread up, because I am looking for specific answers, in search of truth. Not about someone else's experience about an unrelated topic. 0!=1

Guys, you have like 500 threads about solipsism to circlejerk on. Please address the issues in my last post

Timestamped 10:00. Leo does keep saying "Consciousness exists", but that's because he is using the word exist as "its real", not that it "stands out" which is the real meaning of the word. Basically everything he is saying is what I am saying. So I would argue Leo is a non-ipsist. Remember that Leo's target audience is Materialists! 14:30 he suddenly jumps to the conclusion that consciousness can be seen as a giant mind, here is where I am on another boat. That's where his Solipsism root lies. I have no evidence that consciousness is a giant mind, and in fact his earlier statement, that consciousness needs to be without quality to allow for qualities to appear within it, gets trumped by this. Suddenly consciousness has qualities of mind? I would need some further proof of that exact thing. Fire away. PS: Here's just a wonky theory, I don't claim the following is true, I am just trying to understand this solipsistic phenomenon. Maybe there is a giant mind entity, bigger then all other minds, that wants to assert itself as the highest, like a superego, but it is still within the Consciousness with no qualities. As it is so large, larger than all other minds, it lacks the subtlety. There is no other mind (or circle) bigger than it (at the time) to argue with that superego or tell it otherwise, and consciousness itself is silent on the matter, because it is just the space that allows that largest circle to know itself, so that mind appears to itself be God and claims Godhood - again, just because there is no bigger circle (YET) to say otherwise. and because that superego can't see beyond itself just like the normal ego in normal state of consciousness. Just the same delusion, on a whole other level.

I've heard this statement now from many different people at different times, makes me raise an eyebrow, as they all sound so sure... How?? They all claim God gave them their girlfriend somehow and they are 100 percent sure it was God, and not just a chance event. Do these girls not have their own agency? You just wake up and there is a robogirl waiting at your doorstep, ready to fulfill all your dreams and desires,with letter attached from God? You didn't even have to pick her up or ask her out? I want some of that too, tell me how. Looking for clarity, because I might want a girl as well one day, ty.

Are you alone in deep sleep? There is no other? You are alone? Or there is no self either? Please, be as arrogant as you wish, you don't need to care about my feelings, we are talking about truth, right? It makes perfect sense that God / Consciousness is 0. Solipsist takes God/Consciousness to be 1, hence "I am God" statements and solipsism arise. Its a paradoxical subject, because you are that 0 consciousness that doesn't exist. You think they were joking that it can't be grasped with the mind??? if God/Consciousness was 1, thats singularity. It is too full of itself to allow anything else to appear within it. There is no SPACE for anything else! How does God create anything if he is everything already?

There needs to be a you to experience Solipsism. God does not exist - that, just like Leo says about solipsism, shouldn't be viewed with a negative connotation and bias. Consciousness doesn't exist. Everything else is allowed to exist within it. Consciousness does not. If you can see this you are already a Non-ipsist and Solipsism is a joke. If consciousness existed, it would be an appearance. To exist means to STAND OUT. "From French exister, from Latin existō, exsistō (“I am, I exist, appear, arise”)" Consciousness does not ARISE, you definitely are not arrogant, you are just wrong.

I watched part of it. Lets do simple maths. No self, No other. Is this SOLipsism or NONipsism? Self and no other = Solipsism. You are alone. No self and no other = Nonipsism. Welcome back to reality, you are not alone, there is no you. Leo is talking about pure Non-ipsism in this video. When he says You, he is not talking about your 1self, but about the 0self of all. Thats what everyone failing to grasp and its too simple, a child can see it. Beginners mind please. Before enlightenment - Chop wood, carry water After enlightenment - Chop wood, carry water.

@CoolDreamThanks Timestamped for you 7:14 . Start facepalming again

Non-ipsism is the perfect way to point to Ramana's truth. I'm sorry you are attached to the concepts "dream" and "solipsism" to the point you've created a spiritual egoic identity around them. Anyone who disagrees is a confused illusion. Completely disgraceful

If you are a prickle he will say goo. If you are a goo he will say prickle. Until you are a prickly goo. I am humble and honest. So sorry that I disagree with you. If you are making a religion out of his words, you already admit that you missed his teaching completely. Why do you think he didnt allow them to write it down? Entertain me. My answer: because the specific pill was for their mind. Not for everyones.

You are talking out your butthole and gaslighting me. Ofcourse Ramana didnt make the videos, its all from his devotees. What are you trying to pull? Specifically you have missed that anything Ramana said to his students was NOT it. His teaching was silence, I already said this! Ramana would not for a second entrtain your egoic view of reality. He would say things to specific people based on the situation, but these thins were not his teaching. Even the self inquiry "Who am I" is Not Ramana's teaching, but a tool to quiet the mind. You really are going to talk about Ramana Huh?

You need to learn more about Ramana lmao... You're talking with a guy who has binged on Ramana videos for a decade. What you are doing is using these spiritual teachers to present your delusions as true and calling me confused. If you give me a poop on a golden platter, im still not eating that shit! "Oh you're saying the golden platter is not incredible?" "No dude, the golden platter is amazing!! But what you added onto it smells rotten!"

Don't give me that. Disagree with Ramana? His main teaching was silence... Lol... Disagree with Jesus? His main teaching was love. Everything these teachers said was a concession to the thinking mind. They gave you toys to play with to keep your attention while the presence works on you. Please dont give me that. You speak to me about Ramana Maharshi... lol you have no idea who I am.

The reason you can never know is because you can never witness it. "BeCaUsE iT dOeSnT eXisT" is your own assumption and preference. You really write a lot, and I already explained much in detail in previous post. Its 8am and i spent a lot of time writing to you yesterday, and seems in vein. So here is everything explained by an AI which shows exactly the narrow mindedness of your position here. And I am close minded. Sure.... Me: If something is out of your direct experience, you cannot prove if its there or not right now. Guy says that means it doesn't exist. Anothrr guy says it does exist. Third guy says, we cant be sure whether it exists or not. 4th guy says it both exists and not in superposition. Which guy is right ChatGPT: Each person's perspective represents a different philosophical stance: 1. The first guy's perspective reflects a strict empiricist view that only accepts what can be directly observed or experienced as real. From this standpoint, if something is beyond direct experience, it's deemed nonexistent. 2. The second guy believes in the existence of things beyond direct experience, possibly based on faith, intuition, or belief systems. For him, existence transcends direct sensory perception. 3. The third guy holds an agnostic viewpoint, acknowledging the limitations of human knowledge and refraining from making definitive claims about the existence or nonexistence of things beyond direct experience. 4. The fourth guy's viewpoint seems to allude to quantum superposition, a concept from quantum mechanics where particles can exist in multiple states simultaneously until observed. However, applying this concept to existential questions might be more metaphorical or speculative. There's no definitive "right" answer here; it depends on one's philosophical, spiritual, or scientific perspective. Each viewpoint has its own rationale and implications. Me: Ok but you said there is no definitive right answer and you claim this is a right answer. So the guy that already admitted he will never know the right answer, the agnostic, was the only one following truth? ChatGPT: It's true that the agnostic perspective acknowledges the inherent uncertainty in many existential questions, which can be seen as a form of intellectual honesty. However, labeling it as the "right" answer implies a value judgment that may not apply universally. Each viewpoint has its own validity and implications, and what may be considered "right" or appropriate can vary based on individual beliefs, values, and circumstances. So while the agnostic stance offers a humble recognition of uncertainty, it may not necessarily be deemed superior or "right" in every context. See, chatGPT says it best. I cant spend more time arguing when you only see what you see and deny logic because you dont see it. I made sure to include that it is impartial when it says that the agnostic viewpoint is not necessarily the right one, but it admits that it is intellectually honest. While you fail to grasp my position and keep saying i am not honest about this that and the other. You need to grow up and give space to others. Yes, others, you are a noone. You are not The One. I AM NOT THE ONE. WE are both No One.