Salvijus

There's no reason to assume Martin's insights are less valid. Quite the opposite, when examined we can see his insights are much more in line with reason.

Only what accords to reason matters.

Egoic love is the only thing that exists. It's just that you can shift your ego identity to be everything. Then it becomes infinite Self love. But it's the same love.

There is only one type of love called inclusion. If you're partially inclusive, it's called human love. If you're all inclusive, it's called God's infinite love. But it's the same love. The same act of inclusion.

If there are infinite pieces, then it's an infinite love.

Love is another proof that solipsism is bs. Because love is the union between two. It's a relationship between a giver and receiver. Both giver and receiver is God but it proves that God individuates itself to many parts. You're just a small piece in God's puzzle, not the center of the universe. Each piece of the puzzle is as valid as you are. Natasha gets it.

You can know that others are sentient by the virtue of sentience. It takes one to recognizes one. You can become directly concious that everything is concious, not just you.

The difference is, when you awaken from the sleep dream, the sleep world dissappears. But when death happens in real life, only one piece of creation goes away, the rest of it has its own sovergnity.

Another proof why solipsism is bs.

To the extend solipsism describes the oneness of everything, it is true. When solipsism begins to deny the sovergnity and sentience of another part of creation, then solipsism becomes not true anyomore.

Yes. All pieces are one. But those pieces have their own sovergnity. When one piece dissolves in nirvana, the rest of the pieces don't disappear with it as solipsism would imply.

Yes everything is one, but that oneness contains individuality with their own autonomy within that oneness. The problem with the word solipsism is that it excludes that individuality. Therefor, it is a redundant and misleading label to describe reality because it's only partially true. Not wholly true.

God = Solipsism and individuality both at the same time.

His explanation of God being love is absolute best. 1:09:00

"God is experiencing itself through all the characters" ~Martin Ball. Ggwp. He's legit.

This is like open boarders vs closed boarders debate.

I'm of an opinion that the more partners you switch the less likely you are ever going to commit to anyone. Another relationship will become "just another one". Like the more times you use a sticker, the less effective it becomes. I doubt that's a real thing.

You got manipulated into watching that video tho.

Okay.

I think this conversation has value. Do you want to remain mean?

@Alexop if you are able to identify unconicousness in someone, the masculine to do would be to help them see that, not to judge, criticize and demean them. Real masculinity is about brotherhood, not dick measuring contest to prove yourself better than others. By being a dick you'll think you're being masculine, but it's just insecurity.

What if there's nothing wrong with them?

If you're not compatible with someone, why do you assume they are the problem?

🫶

It's funny. You're whining that others are wimps. Doesn't that make you a whimp also?