Echoes

Member
  • Content count

    154
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

112 Outstanding

About Echoes

  • Rank
    Adept

Personal Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

308 profile views
  1. @LetTheNewDayBegin Why should attachment be required for interaction? This is a thread about nothingness where we have a discussion about something we disagree with. What do you expect me to say? To agree with something I don't agree with to prove that I am not attached? Possible it is. Care to show me these examples of the fallacies that describe my mind in perfect detail? If you can I would be grateful.
  2. Say you start your computer and open the website actualized.org. The screen appears literally out of nothing in your field of awareness. When you turn your head away from the screen, the screen literally dissolves into nothing. The supermarket of your town is now literally nothing, only a thought. When you go to the supermarket, the supermarket appears literally out of nothing in your field of awareness. Everything you theorize other than that is theoretical speculation that can never be proven. Things like chemistry or even a brain are ideas in your field of awareness. In "pure" reality there is no such things, just the thoughts of it. There is indeed no start, neither is there an end. there is just ISness, just the timeless now and it's ever changing appearances I can come to the conclusion "It is possible to drink tea out of a cup" without attaching to the idea. It is just a practical cognition. Of course if you are judging reality in good or bad you create certain attachments. If you are in perfect presence, there is no attachment to anything; just the ever changing arising and dissolving of pictures on the movie screen. An attachment implies a energetic bond between emotions/thoughts and a transient object, even if that object is not in your awareness. @Salaam
  3. @Salaam Well if you are stating that what another is saying is ignorant, below your level, is twisting things to make them feel better, thats per definition a degradation of the things being said. Not necesserily of the human being. So where exactly are we disagreeing? When you know that there is this nothingness, you should also know that it is the ground in which everything is arising and dissolving. Why would you attach to something if you are at peace and happy if you are non-attached? That doesn't make sense to me. Thats like saying "What's better not needing an orange, needing an orange, or having the ability to choose when and where you need an orange" You can enjoy the same things non-attached, and an attachement is always a illusory mental fabrication that is only real when you think it is. Why would one attach to transient things? I'm not saying that your 13 different compound patterns or whatever isn't true, but I am saying that they are existing and arising in empty awareness. Yes, there are many modulations and things one can do with consciousness, but that doesn't change the background in which all this takes place.
  4. @Salaam I don't see your disagreement as a degradation, but your constant labeling of other opinions as ignorant, and not on your level of development. Those are just blind assumption you make about people you don't even know, and you are doint it just because they have a different view. If you label Nothingness a paradigm, your "cognitive development" is also just that. You don't even know what the nothingness "paradigm" has to offer or how the actual nothingness feels, yet you are comparing it to your paradigm and saying that it is a higher developed one. What makes you think that the things I talk about are not things I experienced for myself? Again a blind assumption to validate your own viewpoint. That's the exact same thing that Leo for example is saying about Enlightenment too. See? Yours isn't the one and only true approach.
  5. @Salaam What makes you think that I have not faced my own ignorace? Is it because I am not agreeing with you? So everybody who is not agreeing with you hasn't faced their ignorance, is "arrogant", and is twisting things to make them feel better? You assume other opinions are merely "internalized beliefs" and they are triggered from your perspective. Have you considered that all this maybe is not the case? That you are projecting your own mentality onto others? Why the need to degrade other opinions? See, I could say the exact same thing to you. You haven't yet realized absolute nothingness and the background in which all of your cognitive dynamics are arising, and therefore I don't trust in the conclusions you have come to. All of what you have said plays in the relative realm of experience, you haven't yet touched that in which all this plays.
  6. I like Leo's style. He is shocking people out of their delusion, instead of just giving them new "feel good" concepts. Otherwise people wouldn't really listen and understand the message. The majority is so deeply entangled in the dream of their identity, that they won't even consider that it's just a fictional fabrication. This "no bullshit" method is needed to directly point to all the illusions and make people question their deep rooted beliefs.
  7. @Salaam You are calling people of who you don't even know how much experience they have "ignorant" "dunning kruger" "not on your level of cognitive development" "not able to make absolute conclusions". I don't know, maybe you are the one deeply invested and attached to your beliefs? I guess the Buddha and guys like R.Maharshi and Adyashanti are also not on your coginitive level?
  8. @Salaam So are you doing all this also in your deep sleep? Or are you arising out of nothing when you wake up in the morning? All bodily processes are again witnessed by the emptiness behind. You can call people ignorant or dunning kruger about this, but it doesn't make any difference. Of course you can develop your bodily awareness and connect the arising of thoughts with certain dynamics that take place, but all this stuff again takes place in "something" that is pure stillness. You can increase your awareness of events and connections/dynamics on the movie, but that doesn't change the movie screen.
  9. @LRyan Maybe change your psychologist? Doesn't seem like a good choice to stay with your current one. I don't know how hard it is to actually find a good Psychologist who is familiar with the deepest truths and spirituality though
  10. He just tells the truth that you can never be permanently happy within the realm of duality. Put yourself in his situation. He just tries to communicate this fact as clear as possible, and might even use exaggeration to shock people out of there delusional search for happiness in the dualistic world. Otherwise people would never belief this and pay attention, because we all are conditioned to hunt and search happiness in external situations. Why do you take everything he says so literal? In the end we have to find our own path and not blindly follow the path of someone else. You are blessed to know what your LP is. In reality you want the feeling that you projected onto your LP. If you wanted your LP more than anything else in the world, wouldn't you do it then? If you would be really passionate about the thing itself (like drawing or whatever) wouldn't you just do it? This is what Leo is trying to say imo. We have to make money anyway. Why not do it with something we enjoy? You can be fully content in the present moment and do things you love just for the sake of expression and creativity. But if you chase your LP because you projected certain feelings on it in the future, then this will not make you happy ultimately
  11. @Leo Gura Can you elaborate on this please? I struggle with the "field" or "ocean of consciousness" aspect a lot lately and still came to no final satisfactory answer. What seperates our two experiences if no dimensions of any kind exist? If consciousness would be like a infinite empty field, wouldn't this imply a space-like dimension? But the here and now happens in a non-localizable consciousness, like a dream. So does your here and now. What is "between" the two 'here and now's" if we exclude solipsism?
  12. @Salaam Why imaginative? It is the direct opposite. You are the one imagining various theoretical constructs and conditions. Where do thoughts arise in your actual experience? Out of what? But what is the "place" in which heat, bone, sinew, brain and every other thing can exist/arise? Can it be another thing? And in which does this thing then exist? Nothingness is the absolute ground for every-thing.
  13. @Salaam I followed that thread, but as Leo already said, you confuse the scientific idea of nothingness with "actual" nothingness. You take a symbolic, indirect approach to something that is beyond all this. Whatever causes your thoughts may previously had, they are all born in nothing. Where else?