Joseph Maynor

AN INSIGHT ABOUT ENLIGHTENMENT -- LOOSEN THAT GRIP ON BELIEFS ABOUT REALITY The point of Enlightenment is to get you to detach from conceptual beliefs about reality, including the attachments of the Ego. You can use beliefs in the moment as needed, but err on the side of avoiding thinking that truth is to be found via belief. Ground yourself in Existential Truth, surrender to reality fully, and be what is fully, without clinging to any beliefs. You want to live with an empty cup of beliefs not a full cup of beliefs. Do not let the Mind fool you that conceptual truth is Existential Truth. Being emotionally affected by conceptual contradiction implies the Rationalist Paradigm is being accepted implicitly. The conclusion is not that I conceptually know -- it's that I conceptually don't know! Just be in the Now and stop trying to conceptually know. Conceptual Truth is not the filet-mignon of Truth as the Mind thinks it is -- it's actually observation in the moment that is. One of the worst traps of the Ego/Mind causes us to believe is that conceptual truth is Existential Truth. This is our worst trap!

You are both a limited perspective and everything that exists at the same time.

I FOUND A DOGMA IN NON-DUALITY THEORY -- AND WHY THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM How Do You Square This Paradox With Truth? You are both a limited perspective and everything that exists at the same time. I think it comes from the 'everything is one' thesis combined with the need to incorporate other beings into that oneness. We are all made of the same emptiness but have unique perspectives. Ok, but this is still belief though. Nothing in my senses confirms this. This is one of the dogmas of non-duality. Nobody wants to admit that we have no way to know how to regard other minds through experience alone. You can parrot 'everything is One' like a bird all you want, but that doesn't mean that you confirmed it through experience. You can't! Experience also doesn't confirm that Solipsism is true, because that's a conceptualization too. 'All is One' is a conceptualization not the Truth. It's a mental-construct, a belief. Now, why this dogma in Non-Duality theory is ok. The point of Non-duality theory is to put you in touch with Existential Truth. Conceptual truth if mistakenly taken as Existential Truth is always going to self-contradict eventually, as it must. Non-duality theory is no exception to this. 'All is One' is a counter-weight paradigm to be held against the paradigm that we are all separate and distinct individuals. Neither one of these Paradigms can be proven by Truth, so they are both to be arms-lengthed and not clung to tightly. That's the insight. In Conclusion: Being emotionally affected by conceptual contradiction implies the Rationalist Paradigm is being accepted implicitly. The conclusion is not that I conceptually know -- it's that I conceptually don't know! Just be in the Now and stop trying to conceptually know. Conceptual Truth is not the filet mignon of Truth as the Mind thinks it is -- it's actually observation in the moment that is. One of the worst traps of the Ego/Mind causes us to believe is that conceptual truth is Existential Truth. This is our worst trap! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_other_minds Another reading on point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nondualism Video on point to watch. PARAPHRASE OF CONTENT IN EMERALD'S VIDEO (BELOW): Potentially it could be just as true that Paradigm A and Paradigm B are true. They are both equally beliefs. The point is not to debunk basic fact based beliefs. The point is not to get to another belief. The point is to open yourself up and getting yourself to a state of receptivity and get you to realize how little you conceptually know about reality. When you realize the illusory nature of beliefs you can put them down and get in touch with Existential Truth, the truth of the moment. Knowledge is not wisdom and wisdom is not knowledge. Wisdom is always there, it doesn’t need to be acquired; however, wisdom can be blocked. Only keen-awareness can reveal full wisdom in the moment. Wisdom contains everything you need to know in the moment. The Ego is the dam that restricts wisdom from entering the conscious mind.

Yep. Thanks

Trying to control reality is Egoic and an illusion of the Mind. The Body is a conceptualization of what is part of the fabric of what is here, what exists in the moment. Aliveness is a conceptualization. At the end of the day -- you're not gonna find aliveness existing in reality beyond being a conceptualization. So, aliveness is a label. Labels are like leaves being blown around in the wind compared to reality. So, don't let issues with labels change your beliefs or attitudes regarding what's actually here in the moment. What's here is what's here -- you should just accept reality fully. But just because you accept reality DOESN'T mean that you should identify with thoughts and emotions. There is no you to identify, so that's an illusion of the Mind. When you become aware of these identifications, your keen-awareness in the moment will then cause them to dissolve. Find the Authentic-Self and just stay out of its way.

My guess is that you have some self-image issues that you need to identify and work out.

There's an intellectual component to consciousness too. There's experiential awareness and then there's cognitive awareness. And actually both of these are happening simultaneously. Being conscious means that you have a huge shore of reference, that you are studied as much as you are aware of the present moment experientially. We don't talk about this much and nobody ever seems to explain this right. They just want to focus on experiential awareness. Well, a baby has experiential awareness, but that doesn't make the baby very aware, if that makes sense. What the baby is missing is cognitive awareness. You need both to be conscious -- experiential awareness and cognitive awareness. And cognitive awareness uses concepts, thoughts, the Mind. So, don't dump your intellectual life in this work so fast.

I love Science. But it took me many years to have a meta view of Science. You need that too. Otherwise it's tempting to think that Science just is the best knowledge, which is too narrow-minded. My favorite area of Science: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_physics

You don't really give a shit about other people outside of what you want from them. Little empathy or sympathy. Couple that with a manipulative personality that will con and harm people to get what it wants.

Paradoxically the Now is both always changing and never changes.

God help us haha.

List of gurus/ enlightenment teachers I found: Eckhart Tolle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eckhart_Tolle Shinzen Young https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinzen_Young Sadhguru https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaggi_Vasudev Alan Watts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Watts Sam Harris https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Harris Adyashanti https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adyashanti Mooji https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mooji Osho https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajneesh Yogananda https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paramahansa_Yogananda Rupert Spira https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Spira Ken Wilber https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Wilber Sri Sri Ravi Shankar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ravi_Shankar_(spiritual_leader) Peter Ralston (No Wiki Page)

Nice! I've read some Seneca.

Thank you! I will read this.

Watch:

Am I gonna get the snake-oil salesman from the Little House on the Prairie haha.

Frankly, just curiosity. I want to see why these people are so famous.

Let me give another application to the need to seek and not seek paradox: A newbie like me who lives under the Ego paradigm grasps the same reality as Shankar. The only difference is that he has done more work detaching from the Ego. But if Ego is a feature of your reality, then that is reality! This is why Enlightenment is both unsought and sought. Reality doesn't change. What changes is your identification with it. But to the extent that Ego is a feature of reality -- then Ego is contained within reality too! This is kinda hard to get across. Videos on point to watch:

This might be the biggest area of disagreement in this work -- Is Enlightenment something that proceeds by degrees or not? I argue that reality doesn't change but Ego-dissolution is something that takes a course of time to accomplish. This is why there's the paradox that one must both seek and not seek Enlightenment. The only way that you’re gonna get detachment is if the Mind realizes that the paradigms that it's clinging to are not the truth. That takes some work to achieve. Not just meditation and self-inquiry – but finding counter-theories to all your paradigms so the Mind realizes that those paradigms are false and then releases them. You don’t release anything – the Mind has to. Because we have so much cultural-conditioning, you're gonna have a shallow Enlightenment if you don't do this theoretical work. This is where Leo's work is very on point and needed.

The more you detach from conceptualizations, the less monkey-mind the Ego will generate over time. Enlightenment is a life long practice.

I hear people espouse this idea, but this is just another thought -- and therefore untrue. The paradox is that reality is both a dream and not a dream -- and we can also detach from this paradox. And none of this affects reality one whit.

I think everyone would be well-served to watch this video again. It's amazing how well Leo lays out some basic principles of Enlightenment that even a lot of advanced students miss. I just watched it again myself, and I was amazed at how good it is. Invest an hour and fifteen minutes to watch this video today.

No, because that is a pointer. We can point without encapsulating. It's still a model, but much less encapsulating than a definition or 'this is like that'. I can say 'this' or 'this is like that'. The former is much less distorting than the latter. It still assumes a kind of individuation that is problematic. But, we refer to reality as an Idealism for that reason. As an idealism, it is by definition not definable in concepts. We gotta be able to speak. Language is inherently dualistic. But that doesn't mean that reality can be defined in concepts. That is empirically confirmable. That's what makes this kind of expression acceptable to us. We can confirm it empirically. Once you experience nothingness, you realize that reality is the antithesis of a thought. It is that which contains thoughts. But even this container metaphor is just a model. Reality must be observed in itself.

What I am implying there kind of irreverently is that reality cannot be encapsulated by concepts. That's why we use the term 'nothingness' to refer to reality. But we gotta live that not just say it. Saying 'reality is a dream' is like trying to encapsulate a 3-dimensional phenomena into a 2-dimensional model. Almost any statement of the form "Reality is x", where x is a concept, is gonna be technically false. Now, we can speak-loosely in many contexts, but if we're concerned with the highest level of truth, those statements are all technically false. This is why we call reality 'nothingness' or 'everything'. A common mistake I see is people give lip-service to this in theory but oddly forget about it in practice. All that does is cause a nasty trap that will haunt you in this work until you see it and go -- oh shit! -- I've been sloppy -- I got hoodwinked by the Ego/Mind again.

Wow, I didn't realize you had such substance. Why don't you share your wisdom with us more?