Jacobsrw

@Someone here Exactly right. Epistemically speaking, for what you know to be known you must first enter the state of “not knowing” to know it. We don’t ever step outside of our perceptual experience because it was never real to begin with. Just like the mirage of water in the desert. There’s the illusion it exists but it turns out to be just the desert itself. Just like our human experience. It feels like we exist as a human body-mind but it turns out it was just consciousness itself.

@Oliver Saavedra very accurate!

@Leo Gura Haha oh no....He seems to fumble quite a bit. Sprouting ideas he has no sense in knowing. Credit to him for admitting in saying he didn’t really know. Its fascinating that scientists insist on using the mind to try understand things beyond the mind, simultaneously not acknowledging how this is impossible. @Someone here you undermine the fundamental nature of consciousness. Your proposition is equivalent to asking if a rock could become conscious of being rock and identify as a human. It’s not really even a question to entertain. Anything you propose is made of consciousness. You’re using consciousness to try and step outside of consciousness by pointing “hey look over here” when “over here” is no different to where you already stand. Consciousness is not a suggestive possibility it’s fundamental and inescapable.

@Preetom Nice formulations here, except I would claim that the dream state is but the waking state. All that the waking state is founded upon is a hulicinatory dream of mind. All that is “waking” is synonymous with “dreaming” (non-duality). There is no difference between them except that waking appears as a different level of dreaming due to its apparent solidity. If anything, there exist only relative levels of dreaming, all of which rest in a nondual state which waking is a part of.

@RoyThese are very good points. Although I would add that acting goes beyond merely just the entertainment industry but the acting in everything we do. We play a different role in almost every facet of life. In fact, the entirety of human life is one big act. Human life is exhibited through the delusion of infinite roles. Thats the point of spirituality, to dissolve the attachment to acting. The ego is imparted by acting. It’s central existence can only come through the acting of roles. No ego, means no acting. Acting is useful when you are involved in a play, but once the play is finished so too must the actor playing it.

She knows the theory, the question is: is she internally established? One can only approximate and speculate. Ive been following her for a short while and would indeed say her content is far more conducive than that of typical delusional entertainment and media propaganda. However, appearances can be deceiving and most importantly I would suggest that the delivery of these messages necessitate careful consumption as they may become more tantalising than beneficial.

Haha too true. @Dazgwny precisely.

I found this dialogue pretty hysterical for characterising the novice minds conception of enlightenment

@Nahm you are superimposing objectivity from subjectivity. In fact, you are suggesting objectivity can exist from a thought that stems out of a subjective lens. There is no objective reality because separateness is an illusion. As soon as you assert objectivity you assert subjectivity. Because objectivity can exist in opposite from a subject outside of it, in other words, a duality. This all an illusion. There is existence with all its intermediate subsets and that’s it. All expressions of the same existence. There is no seperate subjective/objective to delineate between. You are indirectly creating a duality. All there is is consciousness, which is you.

*humans* let’s find any means caress our ego. “Oh look there’s a new app TikTok!” “Let us use it to have endless entertainment”. *becomes more deluded than ever before*.

@Nahm my experience is not synonymous with your statement. Good and bad can only exist in the conception of mind. This dissolves at the level of consciousness. Ultimately, all is divine neutrality, superseding any dualistic conceptions. Simple.

@James123 exactly. Good and bad are two sides of the very same coin. To know good one must simultaneously know bad. Otherwise, what is the point of reference from which you are assuming the other? Both are illusions, ultimately. @Inliytened1 thank you ?

@Arzack you are superimposing duality. From the perspective of a finite self, there exists a polarity of good and bad. From the ultimate perspective, this is an illusion. To believe in the illusion is to live through illusion.

@Arzack haha trust me I am well informed. I not long ago had a mystical experience which shone light on some of the existential depths of suffering. My comment was not referring to “feel good spirituality” but rather the fundamental infinitude of all things. All things are immensely profound. Whether how painful or comforting they are. That is the beauty of life, to experience all the infinite film reels of reality. How one interprets this is up to them. To me, it is all utterly astounding. But I would recommend in being careful you don’t head down a path of “nihilistic spirituality”. Which many on this forum appear to subliminally subscribe. You just may discover that the duality you held of “doom and gloom” and “all roses” was nothing more than a fictitious illusion.

@Someone here Yes. This is easy to see. Is the same body you have now the same as you had yesterday, last year or when you were 15? The body consists of cells which die and rebirth every day. Is the thought you are having now the same as the one that occurred before it, yesterday or one you were so worried about 2 years ago? Of course not. Thoughts change every instant, that is their very nature. The only continuum of experience is your awareness of experience.

@Arzack and isn’t it just ineffably beautiful ?

@Arzack agreed. However, consciousness requires no refinement as it already pristine and immaculate. The knower who operates from it is whom requires refinement. This is the sole duty of spirituality as you stated

@Someone here Of course there is an undeniable experience. The question is: from where does it stem? One cannot assume the body or mind, since they are ever fluctuating changes of experience. The only persisting aspect of experience is the awareness from which you operate. That is all that maintains the experience you have. All else is relative subjectivity. Meaning, ones assumption of the world is nothing more than an ever-changing illusory lens. This is my view of course.

@Arzack This is essentially what I was stating. I agree. Gurdjieff is explaining consciousness in finite progressive forms. The more developed a sentient, the more consciousness it will exhibit. Hence why, a human is assumed the most conscious exhibiting agent. This could be arguable. Consciousness is primary. Not hard to distinguish considering all facets of one’s experience requires in order to know it. You = Mind = Consciousness = Infinity.

@Arzack No not quite. Mind is a product of consciousness which is what I meant when I stated “imparted by”. For consciousness to be expressed it uses the activity of mind to express it. Mind is limited due to its finite capacity to intermittently express (one thing at a time). All activity is expressed by the mind which is facilitated by the infinitude of consciousness. In short, consciousness is primary. Mt explanation may not have been clear which could have created a misunderstanding.

@Someone here Fair point. To assume an objective world is to assume a “you” seperate from it. This is impossible because the very experience you have is interconnected with everything you experience. You cannot validate a “world” without a YOU to first experience it. You = existence = infinity. This is primary.

@Inliytened1 This is a great post. They call this Naive Realism. One who assumes what they see exists and thus, substantiates all forthcoming experiences from this assumption. Its fascinating because no one can validate their experience beyond the parameters of their own mind, which is coincidentally imparted by consciousness. If one assumes Truth exists “out there” they forget they have superimposed the whole idea “out there”. There is no “out there”. Experience is boundaryless, meaning no distinctions can be drawn. The one drawing the line must be inside the very line they are drawing in order to validate a line was drawn. Its like trying to explain something beyond the parameters of your own mind. One cannot step outside their mind to explain beyond it because it is inevitably the basis for what’s used to explain anything at all.

@Someone here I like this. And Rogans humbleness appears to really show here. However, he still assumes an objective reality outside of consciousness, which seems to undermine his own formulations here. You have to remember that Rogan operates from the materialist paradigm. Which equates to all his theoretical explanations becoming compressed by materialism. This doesn’t mean he has no value to share, but that what he proposes is extremely limited in its depth. Nonetheless good video.

@SchahinGo to your direct experience right now. See what a thought appears to be. You will notice a thought is just a limited experience of consciousness. Each thought is consciousness expressed in a finite constrained manner. A thought is a temporary state of consciousness, an intermittent activity. Thoughts are like waves in a ocean. Consciousness is the oceans source and all activity of the mind and body are activities arising from it.

@Preety_India The role of spirituality is not to abolish the ego but to realise it never existed. It is an illusion. It dissolves from releasing it is no more real than a mirage of water in a desert. Attempting to relinquish the ego will only amplify it. Observing that is was always an illusion will purify ones existence. But I agree with your initial comments. Mixing our Illusory egoic self with our experience only taints it. To see pure is to then see with no attached see-er behind it.