The fallacy of self help

[Javfly33]

1 hour ago, Breakingthewall said:

Conciousness is the fact of being concious or something. Something is needed because if not there is not conciousness.

Maybe Consciousness is literally Nothing or Emptiness itself. So it doesn´t need "Something" to project itself to. Is simply pure emptiness. 

If Consciousness were a thing there would the need of Consciousness (1) + Object/Form (2)

But if Consciousness is Nothing (0) there isn´t a need for two things. One thing is Enough. Is not even One thing, is Zero Thing. 

Edited June 24 by Javfly33

[Breakingthewall]

3 minutes ago, Javfly33 said:

Maybe Consciousness is literally Nothing or Emptiness itself. So it doesn´t need "Something" to project itself to. Is simply pure emptiness. 

If Consciousness were a thing there would the need of Consciousness (1) + Object/Form (2)

But if Consciousness is Nothing (0) there isn´t a need for two things. One thing is Enough. Is not even One thing, is Zero Thing. 

Then why a lot of things appear?

[SOUL]

52 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

Yeah, I have the horrible defect of critical thinking. It's better to be a lamb, no doubt

Anyway, neo advaita self help and neo advaita spirituality is false in its basis. If it's a problem for you that anyone points it, what to do?

I think I have discovered the defect in your thinking...critical thinking isn't the same thing as criticizing something in one's thinking. We can logically reason through something without criticizing it at the same time. There is a distinction.

Also, when we call something false or true in a relative sense it reinforces the dualistic mindset. Them over there with those ideas are false, while me over here with mine are true. Absolute truth isn't the same as relative truth, so different perspectives of it can be equally valid.

You may not have a perspective of absolute truth that resonates with someone else's perspective of it. Instead of criticize another's and call it false instead we can celebrate the diversity of perspectives and recognize they all are infinite expressions of absolute truth.

Sure, you can abide in your own mind pointing fingers at others, calling out your perception of false so continuing to invest in the illusory dualism...or not do that.

[Breakingthewall]

24 minutes ago, SOUL said:

You may not have a perspective of absolute truth that resonates with someone else's perspective of it. Instead of criticize another's and call it false instead we can celebrate the diversity of perspectives and recognize they all are infinite expressions of absolute truth.

No, because absolute truth is limitless, and those perspectives are limited, that is a fact, without the slightest doubt, and I'm pointing it for making you see it. That kind of spirituality is false in it basis, then it doesn't do the work that it should do, otherwise closes you, because it seems smart, seductive, spoken from a position of knowledge, and it's wrong, then a trap

[Breakingthewall]

Contemporary spirituality, directly inherited from Buddhism and its Western derivatives, commits a profound structural error that limits, castrates, and distorts the true expansion of the mind. That error is the denial of the ego.

It is claimed that the ego is maya, an illusion, an empty construction that sustains human suffering. Based on this premise, it is proposed to suppress, transcend, or dissolve the ego as a necessary condition to achieve so-called "enlightenment" or "nirvana." This state, idealized as the ultimate realization, is presented as a realm without desire, without identity, without conflict. However, what is promoted under this label is not real openness, but an existential lobotomy.

The ego is not an illusion in the sense of being nonexistent. It is a real and tangible compendium of energetic, relational, and cognitive structures that compose the concrete configuration of every human being. Denying its existence is equivalent to denying one's own structure, to amputating the foundation upon which all interaction with reality is built. True fulfillment is not accessed by eliminating the ego, but by integrating it, understanding it, and overcoming its limitations without denying it.

The so-called nirvana, as interpreted by this superficial spirituality, is not fullness but amputation. Suffering is eliminated at the cost of eliminating real interaction with the world. Conflict is suppressed, but so is expansion, complexity, and the authenticity of existence. The result is individuals who are apparently calm,  but structurally amputated, incapable of sustaining a realistic, vibrant, and open vision of existence.

Authentic expansion of consciousness is not born from denying the self, but from understanding it as what it is: a real structure that must be integrated into a much broader movement of openness and relationship. Only when the ego is recognized, neither idolized nor denied, can its rigidity be transcended without mutilating the mind or closing the door to true fulfillment.

The spirituality that denies the ego castrates the mind. The one that understands, integrates, and transcends it, without amputation, opens existence to its deepest potential: a living, complex, relational reality where the self is a legitimate form, but not a limit.

 

Edited June 24 by Breakingthewall

[Breakingthewall]

Let's see, serious Buddhism doesn't deny the self; it sees it as a wave in the ocean, not an immovable center but a transient reality.

The adjectives "illusion" and "false" are unnecessary. The ego is absolutely real as form, and its substance is the substance of reality. True nirvana consists in being one with substance, seeing form as what it is, a structure that reality now assumes. Absolutely real as form, perfect, interconnected with the whole; it is the whole in motion.

Simplifying doesn't work; it's impossible to deny what is. The ego has foundations that come from the totality of form; they are butterfly effects of infinity, which in turn cause butterfly effects in infinity. They are the flow of reality. Where's the point in calling it illusion? It's a mistake that castrates the mind.

[Inliytened1]

On 6/21/2025 at 4:56 AM, Breakingthewall said:

There's a very seductive spiritual current that says: if you suffer, it's because you're causing it. Stop causing it, and you'll stop suffering. How do you cause it? With your thoughts. The self is only a thought; stop thinking, and you'll stop suffering. Focus on the NOW, and suffering, that error of the human mind, disappears.

This is absolutely false, simplistic, and very stupid. Conduct an experiment: torture a dog three times a day for years, terrorize it. We'll see if it's still in the NOW without suffering (do that experiment only in your mind btw).

As humans, the energetic structure that forms the self is absolutely real, as real as your physical body. If you have a broken bone in your leg, even if you focus on the NOW, it will hurt

Actually that's false.  Go with what you were saying.  If you truly were able to just be in actuality then pain disappears too.  Everything is completely imaginary even your physical body.  It's just that we have built our constructs so deep that we think we have to be constrained to physical laws.  But they too are imaginary.  Even physical suffering.  Physical suffering is no different then mental suffering. It's just a construct.  A much stronger one but a construct just the same.

Edited June 24 by Inliytened1

[Breakingthewall]

The ego has the substance of reality: infinite. It is not a floating illusion nor a mere accident of perception; it is composed of the entire unlimited relationship that reality is. Its existence, as form, is not independent, but neither is it nonexistent. It is an inevitable and legitimate effect of the infinite in motion.

You cannot recognize its emptiness, but its total fullness. The so-called "emptiness" is merely a negative concept that points to the boundary of form when isolated. But when you understand that all form is the inevitable unfolding of infinite relationship, emptiness dissolves into fullness.

Real freedom is not "letting go of all identification," as if one could dwell in a conceptual limbo without form or content. True freedom is the dissolution of boundaries, recognizing that the limits that seem to separate the self, form, or any structure are merely mental projections. Emptiness, understood as absolute absence or negation, is itself a boundary ,a restrictive concept.

How could an ego, with its millions of nuances, its complexity, its interdependence, its real relational structure, be sustained by nothingness? That makes no sense. If you look from an unlimited perspective, everything is empty in terms of separate meaning, yet at the same time, everything is. Being is everything, implies absolute meaning, not absence of meaning, because being is total. 

Real openness is not found in taking refuge in the denial of form, but in seeing that all form , including the ego, is the direct, inevitable, and absolutely full expression of unlimited reality.

[Breakingthewall]

2 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

Actually that's false.  Go with what you were saying.  If you truly were able to just be in actuality then pain disappears too.  Everything is completely imaginary even your physical body.  It's just that we have built our constructs so deep that we think we have to be constrained to physical laws.  But they too are imaginary.  Even physical suffering.  Physical suffering is no different then mental suffering. It's just a construct.  A much stronger one but a construct just the same.

Sure, then go and fly like Neo. Do it in Iran if you could, then the ayatollah would surrender immediately 

Edited June 24 by Breakingthewall

[Inliytened1]

4 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

Sure, then go and fly like Neo. Do it in Iran if you could, then the ayatollah would surrender immediately 

You could but then you would no longer be in "reality".  

[SOUL]

1 hour ago, Breakingthewall said:

No, because absolute truth is limitless, and those perspectives are limited, that is a fact, without the slightest doubt, and I'm pointing it for making you see it. That kind of spirituality is false in it basis, then it doesn't do the work that it should do, otherwise closes you, because it seems smart, seductive, spoken from a position of knowledge, and it's wrong, then a trap

Read what you wrote back to yourself and recognize the dualism of your words, in your mindset...you say absolute truth is limitless but also put limits on it by saying, no, not yours...just mine.

Again, it seems you are just in love with the stink of your own poop.

[Inliytened1]

1 minute ago, SOUL said:

Read what you wrote back to yourself and recognize the dualism of your words, in your mindset...you say absolute truth is limitless but also put limits on it by saying, no, not yours...just mine.

Again, it seems you are just in love with the stink of your own poop.

But it's Infinite poop.

Edited June 24 by Inliytened1

[SOUL]

Just now, Inliytened1 said:

Infinite poop.

Absolute poop

[Breakingthewall]

2 minutes ago, SOUL said:

Read what you wrote back to yourself and recognize the dualism of your words, in your mindset...you say absolute truth is limitless but also put limits on it by saying, no, not yours...just mine.

Again, it seems you are just in love with the stink of your own poop.

 

Look, the form is infinitely dual, the substance is not dual. To talk you need the form, talking is the form, then form are limits. Do you understand the nuance? It's very simple 

Edited June 24 by Breakingthewall

[SOUL]

1 minute ago, Breakingthewall said:

I'm waiting for someone to appear with enough intelligence to understand the obvious. In the world of spirituality, this is obviously rare.

You are looking behind you for it when it's in front of you, transcend the story of your poop.

Edited June 24 by SOUL

[Inliytened1]

1 minute ago, Breakingthewall said:

I'm waiting for someone to appear with enough intelligence to understand the obvious. In the world of spirituality, this is obviously rare.

I guess we are all just too slow for you 

[Breakingthewall]

6 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

I guess we are all just too slow for you 

Just too closed. 

[Inliytened1]

Just now, Breakingthewall said:

Just too closed. 

Well I wasn't disagreeing with what you said I just expanded it for you a bit.

[Breakingthewall]

Look, supposedly this is a forum of spirituality, supposedly serious. I just did a not bad tesis about some essential matters in actual spirituality and you come with that of poop? Are you....well, put the adjective . Seriously,.try to go deep, out of your dogmas that make you feel so safe. 

[Jordan]

Who says that if you suffer, you are causing it? That sound a bit silly. You can reduce suffering by interpreting in a different way but not choosing to reduce suffering is not the same as causing yourself suffering. Suffering is because you can't accept things the way they are. There is a limit to how much you can accept but you can expand that limit pretty far. It is about how you interpret your experience. You do have some control over that.