Martin Ball says he's not solipsistic

[Razard86]

On 5/28/2025 at 10:52 AM, UnbornTao said:

Hey, most of us (humanity, that is) probably don’t really know what this thing called direct consciousness is, even if the idea points us in a certain direction. So maybe we should start there.

All direct consciousness is, is a clearly felt mental connection with your surrounding environment. When there is no difference between the physical connection and mental connection in your direct experience then you have unlocked direct consciousness.

[UnbornTao]

On 7/19/2025 at 6:08 AM, Razard86 said:

All direct consciousness is, is a clearly felt mental connection with your surrounding environment. When there is no difference between the physical connection and mental connection in your direct experience then you have unlocked direct consciousness.

By a felt mental connection, you're referring to something relative, whereas direct consciousness points to the domain of absolutes. It's not a ‘thing’ that can be apprehended - at least not through conventional means. Even mentioning 'a means' misses the mark, since that too is indirect and step-based. This isn't to dismiss feeling states or the value of becoming more present or aware. We can understand the theory, but don't have a conscious experience of what it is pointing to yet - hence our dilemma. But again, it's perfectly fine not to know what direct consciousness is.

Edited July 20 by UnbornTao

[Aaron p]

Darth Ball, a strong apprentice, but not the chosen one.

Edited July 20 by Aaron p

[Razard86]

On 7/19/2025 at 8:27 AM, UnbornTao said:

By a felt mental connection, you're referring to something relative, whereas direct consciousness points to the domain of absolutes. It's not a ‘thing’ that can be apprehended - at least not through conventional means. Even mentioning 'a means' misses the mark, since that too is indirect and step-based. This isn't to dismiss feeling states or the value of becoming more present or aware. We can understand the theory, but don't have a conscious experience of what it is pointing to yet - hence our dilemma. But again, it's perfectly fine not to know what direct consciousness is.

I mean no such thing, everything you just wrote has absolutely nothing to do with what I am talking about. Love is connection, who knew the truth could be so simple and humans can STILL find a way to be confused and try to complicate it?!! Love is connection, and the Universe is mental. When all connections are seen/experienced to be Mental then Direct Consciousness has been achieved.

Edited July 21 by Razard86

[James123]

On 7/19/2025 at 8:08 AM, Razard86 said:

physical connection and mental connection

Aren't they identical? 😂 

[UnbornTao]

On 7/21/2025 at 1:49 AM, Razard86 said:

I mean no such thing, everything you just wrote has absolutely nothing to do with what I am talking about. Love is connection, who knew the truth could be so simple and humans can STILL find a way to be confused and try to complicate it?!! Love is connection, and the Universe is mental. When all connections are seen/experienced to be Mental then Direct Consciousness has been achieved.

Feeling and connection reside within the world of process and activity, and so they are still too far from 'direct.'

It is consciousness being in the same "place" as the thing being contemplated - or so the theory goes. In the end, it's better left as a possibility one can personally have and verify for oneself.

Edited Tuesday at 09:13 PM by UnbornTao

[Razard86]

14 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

Feeling and connection reside within the world of process and activity, and so they are still too far of 'direct.'

It is consciousness being in the same "place" as the thing being contemplated - or so goes the theory. At the end of the day, it's better left as a possibility that one can personally have.

There is no process, connection is not a process. Connection is direct. Why? Because connection is awareness and awareness is beyond all processes. Many of you get lost in maya and vagueness and this is why you don't achieve the love connection of direct consciousness. Are you aware that everyone and everything is you? Are you aware that everything is housed within your mind? Are you aware that your consciousness is completely identical with everything? Until the answer is YES to everything I just wrote then Direct Consciousness has not been achieved.

There are too many people on this forum who waste time engaging in non-duality debates, and waste time being verbose and pushing vague notions of confusion around Spirituality. Posts such as those do not serve to guide those who come to this website looking for advice on how to awaken. Your post above is such a post. 

It's why I'm glad I was able to weed through the chaff and fully awaken that everything is me. Now all I desire is to help my SELF awaken in the humans who come here looking for tips on how to go about that process. If your goal in your posts in the Spirituality Section isn't to help then all it means is you are playing the role of blocking those who are eager to awaken. 

[UnbornTao]

On 7/22/2025 at 2:02 AM, Razard86 said:

There is no process, connection is not a process. Connection is direct. Why? Because connection is awareness and awareness is beyond all processes. Many of you get lost in maya and vagueness and this is why you don't achieve the love connection of direct consciousness. Are you aware that everyone and everything is you? Are you aware that everything is housed within your mind? Are you aware that your consciousness is completely identical with everything? Until the answer is YES to everything I just wrote then Direct Consciousness has not been achieved.

There are too many people on this forum who waste time engaging in non-duality debates, and waste time being verbose and pushing vague notions of confusion around Spirituality. Posts such as those do not serve to guide those who come to this website looking for advice on how to awaken. Your post above is such a post. 

It's why I'm glad I was able to weed through the chaff and fully awaken that everything is me. Now all I desire is to help my SELF awaken in the humans who come here looking for tips on how to go about that process. If your goal in your posts in the Spirituality Section isn't to help then all it means is you are playing the role of blocking those who are eager to awaken. 

It is equally easy - for me or anyone - to speak about any subject, yet that doesn't make it true or mean it comes from an authentic experience or breakthrough. In the end, it has to be real. Now, one trap we can easily fall into is generating experiences formed by or even based on the beliefs we hold as individuals. This is entirely subjective, possible, and might be the case here - especially if there was drug use involved. It can also be powerful, convincing, and even healing and beneficial, yet that doesn't change the fact that it is belief-based. Based on your past history, I still sense quite a bit of fantasy in the air (as in your post on exiting the body and experiencing your unlimited self.) If it's true for you, and to the degree it is, then great - but since you've already asserted that it is, I'm writing this as a reality-check. Take it into account.

Quote

All direct consciousness is, is a clearly felt mental connection with your surrounding environment. When there is no difference between the physical connection and mental connection in your direct experience then you have unlocked direct consciousness.

To clarify, connection implies that something was separate from another thing in the first place. Everything relative is a process, even if it occurs in a millisecond. It is comprised of steps and happens within time. You keep framing the matter as relative - probably as a state, from the way you write. If it comes from a real enlightenment, your mind might be focusing on what it can focus on - the "side-effects" of the breakthrough, which are not the consciousness itself. But direct consciousness has nothing to do with your surrounding environment, feeling, love, state, or the mind. It is not a perception nor an experience. The way language is used hints at where one is or may be coming from.

Let me ask: What purpose does asserting something presumably absolute serve for others, in the end?

My post was more of an attempt to uncover some possibly overlooked assumptions, whereas yours was, in my view, somewhat misleading from the get-go. Notice, the direction of mine was to negate or remove conceptual stories, whereas you simply made an assertion about the nature of something, tacitly meant to be believed. I presented a possibility, whereas you made a sloppy, inaccurate claim, referring to process (felt mental connection, surrounding environment, etc.)

I'm not saying I know - but it is likely that you don't either, and instead are reacting against that suggestion. Rigor and a "rock-bottom" kind of honesty are cornerstones of this contemplation work - along with groundedness.

And, after all this chatter, what has each of our responses accomplished? At best, they can provide some direction for others, hopefully towards something real; at worst, people will believe them based on their preferences and past beliefs, which is not useful at all. This may still turn out to be somewhat useful:

Quote

Feeling and connection reside within the world of process and activity, and so they are still too far from 'direct.'

It is consciousness being in the same "place" as the thing being contemplated - or so the theory goes. In the end, it's better left as a possibility one can personally have and verify for oneself, rather than simply an assertion to be believed.

Sometimes, not saying something is a better way to assist others than feeding their minds with what they want to hear.

Edited Thursday at 01:00 PM by UnbornTao

[SOUL]

On 7/21/2025 at 6:02 PM, Razard86 said:

There are too many people on this forum who waste time engaging in non-duality debates, and waste time being verbose and pushing vague notions of confusion around Spirituality.

10 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

Sometimes, saying nothing is a better way to assist others than feeding their minds with what they want to hear.