• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Telepresent

  • Rank
    - - -

Personal Information

  • Gender
  1. @AwakenedSoul444 Mckenna is describing the difference between two things people can use the word 'enlightenment' to describe: an experience (I.e. a change of the sensations that you have) as a temporary state from which you return to how you were prior. Or, a dissolving of self / personal identification, which he describes as a permanent state. Pay attention to how he talks about the failure of definitions and terminology in Theory of Everything (and how his preferred term would be 'untruth unrealisation' - compare that to how others define enlightenment). Learn to read what different people mean when they say 'enlightenment'. Then don't trust anyone and work it out for yourself, cos that's the only way it will have any substantive reality for you
  2. Don't take what he says as read. Check for yourself
  3. What is your objective? Where are you going? If you want to reply with "enlightenment" or something like that, try not to use the word and be as specific as possible in your meaning. You don't want to asking one thing, and getting 30 comments pointing you somewhere else
  4. @Rujan Mehar Bajracha I'd urge caution for one reason: assuming you live in a similar society to mine, you are as yet unable to earn your own keep, support yourself. You are still under the expectations of parents, teachers, etc. By all means explore this, but be careful about what "going all in" means at a point in life where you are societally vulnerable. Being able to support yourself and survive is a key, otherwise how can you do the work?
  5. @Truth Addict Infinity is a bitch because it doesn't really align with the way our minds work. I'm not going to try to argue anything about what infinity may or may not be, but I will argue that it is an inevitability. So this doesn't mean that 'reality' (whatever we think of or mean by that term) is infinite, but that it must be couched within infinity (and weirdly, therefore also be infinity itself, even if 'reality' is not infinite - as there can be nothing other than infinity. So anything finite must be a defined part of infinity, therefore infinity itself... see what I mean about it not being the way our minds work?) Anyway, it's as simple as this: Picture a finite thing. You're picturing it in a space. What are the boundaries of that space? You're picturing that within another space... keep going indefinitely. You'll hit an infinite "amount" of spaces and an infinite "amount" of boundaries - it will never, ever stop. It might sound unsatisfying if you want to make infinity a thing, but it's not a thing. Thus you're not going to be able to think of or picture it. You can also do the same thing in reverse (which is useful, as we tend to think of infinity in some way as meaning "really big", when all it means is not-finite). So picture the tiniest thing you can think of. What's it made of? Ok, so what is that made of... ad infinitum. But we can argue infinity as a certainty: Infinity must be, because we have two options; 1) Something exists. Therefore (as above) it unceasingly expands to infinity. 2) Nothing exists. Therefore nothingness is infinite, as there is nothing to bound nothingness. Either way, infinity is an inevitability. ... But that doesn't necessarily mean that what we think of as reality is infinite. Or what we think of when we imagine infinity is infinite. Or anything else. Just that infinity is inevitable, and our minds aren't really made to get it.
  6. @Serotoninluv it@Serotoninluv @Serotoninluv Excuse the editing, my phone's gone mad. But it can complicate rather than simplify things. We're about simplifying, right?
  7. @Serotoninluv fair duo's and fair play
  8. @yangmilun ok, ok. I think I see where you're coming from, and that this argument isn't going to help. Explore in yourself what is the I that makes choices, and commands motion. The I that picks up a stone or a fork. Dissect it
  9. And a beautiful example of intentionally missing the point
  10. Quotes are bullshit. Unless you are deeply understanding of the context, they are meaningless. I'm willing to bet I could quote mine Hawking to support an argument that the earth is flat
  11. @yangmilun so you going to take everything he says as absolute truth? Who even is he? Some guy on the Internet You going to trust his conclusions about life even if they make no sense to you? Must mean you're wrong?
  12. @Ibn Sina who said you CAN understand?
  13. @yangmilun Who said you need to understand?