Hyper Normalisation.

[Mellowmarsh]

2 minutes ago, Wilhelm44 said:

You seems to have all these quotes which Newman never said 

ps I don't agree with everything he says.

It seems that Mr.Breakingthewall is talking about opening yourself up to your unlimited nature. As if there’s a self that is closed off to it that can if it wants to open up the closure. 
 

It seems like Mr.Breakingthewall is referring to something that can free itself from being closed by opening itself up to its unlimited nature. But then when Jim says something along the lines of “ free yourself from that “ that’s just a ridiculous joke according to Mr.Breakingthewall. 
 

I don’t know about you Wilhelm, but me thinks both Jim and Breakingthewall are referring to the same idea, maybe just using different definitions / words or meaning to say the same thing? 😩 
 

 

 

[Mellowmarsh]

It’s a bit like a situation where there are 6 artists all sitting at their easels in the middle of a vast landscape and each one of them are looking at the exact same landscape that is in front of their eyes. The 6 artists all paint the same landscape but their paintings will all be different, not one of the six paintings will be an identical match to the landscape nor will one the 6 paintings be an identical match to any of the other 5 paintings.

 

This pointing illustrates how differently the mind tries to construct an image using “paint words” used to point to the unlimited, and how painting those mental images using words are all going to be expressed differently, and it won’t effect or change the actuality of the unlimited one iota.

 

Trying to get Breakingthewall to understand this is impossible. 

Edited Tuesday at 08:44 AM by Mellowmarsh

[Wilhelm44]

31 minutes ago, Mellowmarsh said:

I don’t know about you Wilhelm, but me thinks both Jim and Breakingthewall are referring to the same idea, maybe just using different definitions / words or meaning to say the same thing? 😩 
 

Yes, Jim says he is happy to do a free whatsapp call to settle this 

[Mellowmarsh]

6 minutes ago, Wilhelm44 said:

Yes, Jim says he is happy to do a free whatsapp call to settle this 

That’s great news. Yay! 🥳 

[Mellowmarsh]

2 hours ago, Wilhelm44 said:

It's funny, I just made this little video yesterday.

Nice. 🙂

 

Nothing is forever. Nothing knows itself. Nothing is happening. 

Nothing cannot not exist, therefore nothing is everything all at once without a second.

 

 

“Director Stanley Kubrick famously captured the psychological terror of space by noting that the universe is not hostile to us. .it is indifferent. Space does not hate humanity or actively try to destroy us; it simply does not care. Entire civilizations, planets, and stars could vanish in an instant, and the cosmos would not even notice.” 

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 10:00 AM by Mellowmarsh

[Mellowmarsh]

[Wilhelm44]

1 hour ago, Mellowmarsh said:

So would you say indifference = love ?

[Mellowmarsh]

1 hour ago, Wilhelm44 said:

So would you say indifference = love ?

Maybe unconditional love insofar as everything is allowed to be in the instant being is known one with the knowing. 
 

What is this knowing that unconditionally loves? 

[Mellowmarsh]

The Spiritual and Psychological View: Unconditional Love

Radical acceptance: Some spiritual and philosophical traditions view the universe's lack of judgment as a deep, mirror-like form of unconditional love. Because the universe doesn't condemn or grade your flaws, it leaves you completely free to simply exist. 

A blank canvas: From this perspective, indifference and unconditional love share the same face—the universe doesn't interfere with your choices or impose conditions on your worth, meaning you have to generate your own purpose and compassion from within. 

The human role: The universe itself doesn't possess a brain or emotions to actively "love" you; instead, love is something humans experience and create inside the universe. 

[Mellowmarsh]

In Eastern non-duality—most famously found in traditions like Advaita Vedanta, Zen Buddhism, and Daoism—peace is not found by changing the universe, but by shifting where you think you end and the universe begins.

Instead of seeing yourself as a lonely human looking out at a cold, indifferent cosmos, non-duality teaches that you are the universe experiencing itself.

Here is how these traditions reconcile indifference and unconditional love:

 

1. Reinterpreting "Indifference" as Wholeness

Beyond judgment: In Western thought, "indifference" feels cold because we contrast it with human warmth. In non-duality, the neutrality of the universe is seen as absolute perfection.

The mirror analogy: The cosmos is often compared to a giant mirror. A mirror reflects a beautiful flower or a roaring fire with equal clarity, without clinging to the beautiful or being burned by the destructive. This total refusal to judge or reject anything is what non-duality calls true unconditional love.

 

2. Dissolving the Separated Self

No "Me" vs. "The Universe": In everyday life, we feel like an ego trapped inside a bag of skin, fighting against an external world. Non-duality asserts this boundary is an illusion.

Waves in the ocean: You are not a fragile wave trying to survive the ocean; you are the ocean taking the temporary shape of a wave. When you realize you are the entire fabric of reality, the fear of an "indifferent" universe vanishes. You cannot be threatened by something you are not separate from.

 

3. The True Meaning of Love

Love as a state of being: In these traditions, love is not an emotion or a transaction ("I love you because..."). Love is what is left over when the illusion of separation disappears.

Radical inclusion: Because there is only one ultimate reality (called Brahman in Vedanta, The Dao in Daoism, or Rigpa/Buddha-nature in Tibetan Buddhism), everything is inherently allowed to exist. The universe's "indifference" is actually its total, unyielding permission for you—and everything else—to be exactly as it is.

[Wilhelm44]

11 minutes ago, Mellowmarsh said:

The universe's "indifference" is actually its total, unyielding permission for you—and everything else—to be exactly as it is.

Beautiful, thank you 

[Mellowmarsh]

Just now, Wilhelm44 said:

Beautiful, thank you 

🙏💫

[Sugarcoat]

On 2026-10-18 at 11:04 AM, Breakingthewall said:

It's no competition with the yogi, it's just that Ramana maharshi is a mess as a teacher, he's useless. He's full of contradictions, and the biggest bullshit of all: the teaching by presence.

Look at this: as I'm peaceful holy enlightened I'm going to transmit you enlightenment , then when you ask me any question, I will look at you in silence 8 minutes and then I will say: namaste. Then you will get so impressed that maybe you will get enlightened or anything better. And then I will say that I can enlighten a cow and that my mother did mashamadi and she is out of the wheel of reincarnations. 

Imo logic is better, enlightenment is the breaking of the limits of the psyche, not anything else. Then can be defined, explained and reasoned, if you have an IQ over 80

Presence can definitely have an effect but not to that extreme degree most likely, and it depends on the other person too how much they are receptive to it. 

[Breakingthewall]

On 20/10/2026 at 0:02 PM, Mellowmarsh said:

The universe is not indifferent to us. from an unlimited perspective we are the universe. There is not other, nothing above you from an open perspective.

From a closed perspective there are others and the universe is not indifferent, it makes you exist as a form, all the movement of the universe is perfectly coordinated to makes you exist right now. 

Edited 48 minutes ago by Breakingthewall

[Breakingthewall]

On 20/10/2026 at 8:20 AM, Mellowmarsh said:

A genuine curious question for you Mr. Breakingthewall
 

This “formless” you mentioned above in your post, that takes the structure of a self now, must by definition look like what exactly?

What does a formless structured self actually look like, to you personally, what I mean is, does this self structure formed by the formless have an image that can be looked upon? And if you say yes, it can be looked upon, then can you show to us readers what this looked upon formless formed structure of self looks like, so that we can all see for ourselves what it is you are attempting to show us? Can you do that so we can get some idea of how real it is in your personal logic ?

If you can’t show us then just be honest and say you can’t, but if you can show us then that will be much appreciated thanks.

I’ll wait patiently for your response, I’m looking forward to seeing what you show us. 
 

 

The formless is not something without form, is the absolute fact of being, that always appears as a form because "appearing" means differentiation. 

The self is form perceiving itself, but it's also formless perceiving itself, because any form is the formless manifested. The formless is in the form, the form is in the formless. It's not a twisted game of words, it's obvious. Every form is. Being appears because not appearing not appears. How could be otherwise?

[Breakingthewall]

2 hours ago, Sugarcoat said:

Presence can definitely have an effect but not to that extreme degree most likely, and it depends on the other person too how much they are receptive to it. 

Maybe those saints have a very intense or pure presence, and they could be really saints absolutely opened to the unlimited without any human hindrance, but then they explain it a cryptic way, and it's very frustrating listening them for people who is interested in spirituality because what they say seems meaningless , intentionally mysterious, or at least is what I felt when I listened ramana

Edited 1 hour ago by Breakingthewall

[Breakingthewall]

On 20/10/2026 at 9:51 AM, Wilhelm44 said:

You seems to have all these quotes which Newman never said 

ps I don't agree with everything he says.

I should read him more deeply, agree, but I remember have read that quote. About the video call, i don't think I could talk deeply about this topic in a conversation. The point for me is not saying a single world that is not correct, and for that I have to be in a state of openess, like meditation. If I have an appointment at 4 to discuss about the topic would be impossible because anything of those ideas wouldn't have any sense. Talking about this topic has to be direct, without the filter of the learned ideas 

[Breakingthewall]

On 20/10/2026 at 4:20 PM, Mellowmarsh said:

Instead of seeing yourself as a lonely human looking out at a cold, indifferent cosmos, non-duality teaches that you are the universe experiencing itself.

Totally true

On 20/10/2026 at 4:20 PM, Mellowmarsh said:

Beyond judgment: In Western thought, "indifference" feels cold because we contrast it with human warmth. In non-duality, the neutrality of the universe is seen as absolute perfection.

Sure because from an open perspective the universe is not indifferent, it is, and that's everything. Can't be indifferent to you because you are that, you are not separated from universe, you are precisely the universe, then "indifferent" is meaningless.

 if you loose the contraction that keeps you closed, you perceive your self as unlimited, and the alive quality of the existence manifest itself clearly. It's not indifferent or concerned, it is , period 

 

On 20/10/2026 at 4:20 PM, Mellowmarsh said:

True Meaning of Love

Love as a state of being: In these traditions, love is not an emotion or a transaction ("I love you because..."). Love is what is left over when the illusion of separation disappears.

Radical inclusion: Because there is only one ultimate reality (called Brahman in Vedanta, The Dao in Daoism, or Rigpa/Buddha-nature in Tibetan Buddhism), everything is inherently allowed to exist. The universe's "indifference" is actually its total, unyielding permission for you—and everything else—to be exactly as it is.

On 20/10/2026 at 4:20 PM, Mellowmarsh said:

 

I don't know if being open to the absolute is love, seems that love implies two, total openess to the absolute is just absence of barriers between you and the absolute being, maybe that's love according to them 

Edited 1 hour ago by Breakingthewall