Truth Addict

@Brittany Hehe, true. I just don't find anything satisfying. I also haven't found my life purpose yet. The problem is that I set goals but I can't achieve them, because I don't really have the motivation for them. I know my movement should be genuine, but I don't find anything to do honestly. Everything seems pointless.

@Brittany Thank you for your nice words. I get your point, but that doesn't change anything. I've been trying so hard to change, tried many different ways, everything failed. I feel like life is leading me this way. And I feel that I shouldn't resist it.

@pluto Thanks ?

@Faceless Why do you rank truth (experience) above illusion (belief)? In total nonduality, they're the same thing. The experience you're having right now can't be had without beliefs, also interestingly, thoughts and beliefs (contrary to experience) are the thing that makes experience make sense at all, because you can only have an experience if you have something to compare it against, which is thought, polar opposites, same thing actually. Without thought, how would you know that there is an experience happening?

It happens to 'you', just like life also happens to you. But who is 'you'? I don't know, and I'm not sure there might be an answer without belief.

Easy man ? You should be able to see that even the most fundamental truths about reality and how you aquire your information and sensations, cannot be trusted, exactly as thoughts, they're mere stories, only more intense. One dream within another. Ask yourself, why do you identify with your sight? How do you know that sight is yours? The answer is thoughts and beliefs, nothing else.

Not everything has to be serious. It's okay to have some fun

I actually understand that. I did many times rest in awareness (though I'm not completely aware or awake). Beliefs are no different from sight and hearing. The self wants to ground itself in illusion to feel solid and secure. Alright, we agree on that. But again, why not using beliefs to your benefit? Since even truth is an illusion.

I think you should replace the 'we' with 'I'. Only you shall answer your question.

Yes. What's the point of not believing? What's the point of living? What's the point of asking? What's the point of answering? What's the point of having or not having a point at all? You see, there are many layers of beliefs running. You just can't avoid believing. So choose your beliefs consciously. This is my advice. Inhaling contradits exhaling, and both create life (life = duality = nonduality), but who is right? Maybe everyone

@Joseph Maynor @Faceless I think you're both talking about the same thing from different angles.

And here we are running circles around forever. Maybe there is no answer to this question. The self is created by beliefs, and beliefs are created by the self. Chicken and egg dilemma. At this point, and after you saw raw reality (without beliefs), I think one should make a conscious belief, because this state of no beliefs is not beneficial, and maybe harmful to reality at large. Also, 'no beliefs' don't explain anything, so we're clueless forever or claiming to know while we truly know we're clueless. I think it is time to start believing. Believe!

@Faceless Actually, you can't perform in life without beliefs, whether you are aware of them or not. You and I believe, for example, that fire hurts, it's not a fact, it's a belief. (Movement of thought). And in fact, you're here discussing and interacting because you believe in something, I don't know what that is, but it's definitely a belief. But this is slightly off-topic. Here's the thing, you believe that beliefs are not the Truth (the map is not the territory). It's a belief. Are you aware of this? You really can't move forward in life without beliefs, and some beliefs can be better than others. You will have to choose. But you can't avoid belief. And no, I don't think of beliefs as illusions or facts, etc... Beliefs are just beliefs (not the Truth, not reality, not illusions, not facts. Only beliefs). The problem comes when we try to avoid them, claiming (believing) that they contradict with reality. Btw, it's nice having a conversation with you.

@Faceless There is one assumption that you might not be aware of when it comes to this specific topic, and that is you believe that beliefs are not reality itself, and that they are something contrary to the Truth. I don't know honestly, but why would you assume that too? Isn't that a belief?

It could be a theory if you wanted to. But when it's not, it's above everything else. I'm not there yet, I think. Doesn't matter. Can't trust anyone on this but myself, maybe I'm deluded by myself too, lol.

Awareness.

I see, but what is the grounding for that?

@Faceless I agree, thoughts are created by experiences, memories, etc... (self). But again, experiences, memories, etc... (self) are created by thoughts in the first place. Where is it all occurring and why?

First of all, I'm not saying that mathematics is wrong or bad or anything like that, I'm here to make some things clear about it. Also, I don't have any historical resources for my information below, I just assume that it happened the way I describe. . So we start: Have you ever happened to question mathematics? Especially this special and most obvious truth of (1+1=2). If you did question it, you'd immediately see what's really going on. So my claim, in brief, is that all mathematics is only concepts within the mind, it doesn't have anything to do with the Truth. For the case I'm here to discuss (1+1=2), whatever object in reality, it doesn't have any digital value (1 or 2 or anything else), because it is itself, and nothing else. Mathematicians and logicians are (or maybe just the human mind) very intelligent thinkers, they were able to create conceptual values for objects, so then they could use it to benefit practically. This means that we agreed (unconsciously, but they did consciously) that every distinct object in reality has a value of 1 and if we have another object then we have another 1 etc... Now what happened is very smart and interesting, as human societies started to get complicated and increased in numbers, etc... They needed to create something to help them with their trades, relationships, life, etc... to make them easier, so they started to use mathematics; they (and we as well) agreed that they could combine distinct objects intellectually, so they created the "plus" symbol and used it as a tool to combine the digital values that they created in the first place. They agreed that they could code this process with language (mathematics), just like any other language, to help socialize and interact easier. So, for example, if we have an orange, we say we have one orange, and if we have another orange we say we have two oranges instead of saying we have one plus one oranges. (One orange + one orange = two oranges) rather than (one orange + one orange = one orange + one orange). Notice how beneficial this is, symbolic abbreviations that help us consume less time, especially these days when we deal with millions and billions. Actually, we can't perform without mathematics, because without mathematics, if you wanted to say one hundred you would say one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one etc... to a hundred, think about a million then ? You see, we created this conceptual framework to make life easier, and it does make it easier. The problem here is that we take it for granted, and we tend to forget how it initiated and evolved. This is the whole show at play, it's only a human convention. Not the Truth. And that's why we can't prove it, because you can't prove what you construct (you can't prove that C + A + T = CAT because it's it by your own definition). In reality, we can't combine stuff together, if we have one orange and another one, and we want to combine them together, we will ultimately get one orange. An easier example to explain this is if we take each orange and squeeze it then combine the juices together, we will only get one single juice not two separate juices. That's why the final result of any combination must be one number that has one value, not a single digit necessarily, but a single whole number (a unity) (37485836 is a single number or a unity, because it's not 37485835 + 1)... (CAT is a single unity, because it's not C + A + T). This is a proof of the unity of everything. One contains everything. 1 + 1 = 1 And I'm done. @Dodo (hope I made my claims clear to you). @Leo Gura (just in case you haven't seen the post).

@Outer I think I owe you an apology too.

@Dodo Hey, sorry for the late reply, but I thought very much about what happened here (our discussion) and came out with this result: First of all, I apologise for being blind of my arrogance. I should have seen it in myself and acted more maturely and admitted that I was not precise at all. Now I realized the problem, I was metaphorical about my statements, and you took them literally. And that made me lose sight of the main point of my post, which therefore led us out of context, I guess this sums it all up. And to be honest, it was totally my fault (because you should take every statement literally unless it's mentioned otherwise) and I'm sorry. I hope you forgive me cuz that will set me free. So, just to be clear, 1 + 1 = 2 , no doubts. My whole post was just a pointer to show that mathematics is a collective conceptual agreement (couldn't edit post title), and you can disagree with me if you want, you definitely know better than me since you are a maths teacher. Let us forget the past, and forgive. I hope that mistake will not happen again, and I'm sorry if I caused you any discomfort. Much much love and respect. ?

@Dodo I said "inquiring" alone, without a "self". Maybe it's only my opinion. Maybe I'm deluded. We agreed that it's the same thing at last. What is different though is the conceptualizing, because an object is only itself, and multiple objects is a concept. One and one is still not quite accurate, because it's a value and a concept, maybe I was thrilled a little bit. The real thing (not necessarily actually real) is what is, not what we think it is. Saying an orange is also a conceptualizing, therefore we can't rely on discussion, all we have is our subjective experiences, and inquiring. I don't defend anything, I only say what I see, and you kept quoting and mentioning me until I responded, I didn't want to reply at first. Much love ?

@Outer @Dodo There is experience. Of course 1 and 1 is a concept, only here. But in your experience it's not, because it's it, a 1 and 1. Not 2 because 2 is a concept. All you need is some inquiring and you'll see what I see.

@Outer You still don't get it. You guys are most of the time off topic, maybe it's me that's bad at delivering ideas. I could never have 2 oranges, this only happens in your mind. Instead, I could only have 1 and 1 oranges. You and me and others agreed unconsciously to call 1 and 1 a 2. Still don't get it? I lost hope.

@Outer I wasn't discussing the validity of mathematics, obviously it's valid and practical. It's very beneficial to us. But that's not the point. My main aim was to show you how it's irrelevant to Truth, that (1+1=2) is not a Truth, (1+1=2) is a collective agreement, a human convention, and therefore cannot be proven or disproven. I always thought (1+1=2) is a "Mathematical Truth" or a proof for the validity of mathematics. My original post was to show you that mistake, so you don't fall for it like I did. That's all.