winterknight

Enlightenment is turning the volume all the way down on experience

117 posts in this topic

7 minutes ago, tedens said:

It's looping, man. So it is and isn't.

It's not really looping. There's no 'it' to loop.

2 minutes ago, Aakash said:

the most accurate way to put it, 

non-existence-existence? 

There is no most accurate way to put it. There's no way to put it at all.


Website/book/one-on-one spiritual guidance: Sifting to the Truth: A New Map to the Self

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, winterknight said:

Wrong to say because the very categories of language and thought are dependent on the illusion of separation. When those are stripped away, there is no one to say "there is experience" at all, or an experiencer, or experiencing, etc. Or, of course, a 'liberated one.'

But wouldn't that extent to everything you say as well? 

My question remains, what makes your experience more truthful than others? This is what you are suggesting in the video, no?


To a fox, trickery is truthfulness. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

@Aakash point is you can be dual or non-dual..they're identical.  But you know that. 

@winterknightBut to squeeze the beauty out of duality and form/creation by casting it away is not God's intention.  One should embrace it and love it.   

Edited by Inliytened1

We must not cease from exploration and at the end of all our exploring will be to arrive at the place where we began and to know the place for the first time.       --T.S Eliot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

@Inliytened1 @winterknight

What i'm saying here is kinda twisted. 

Non-duality transcends itself an infinite number of time, because it can be none, one, two --- Over and over again 

So i'm saying what me and @ilytened1 are talking about is one transcendence of non-duality

FoxFoxFox is similarly on the same pathway however, he seems to be talking about another transcended version of non-duality

and wintersolider is talking about a different transcended version of non-duality

The issue is they are all correct, we just need to establish in what order it is... By retracting the number of steps before reaching that step, against known scriptures. To see which is the highest transcendance

 

Edited by Aakash

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, FoxFoxFox said:

But wouldn't that extent to everything you say as well? 

My question remains, what makes your experience more truthful than others? This is what you are suggesting in the video, no?

It's not that my experience that is more truthful than others, but rather that I am describing what is the case for everyone in fact.

Of course what I'm saying affects everything I'm saying as well. The question is: what does that mean?


Website/book/one-on-one spiritual guidance: Sifting to the Truth: A New Map to the Self

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Aakash said:

@Inliytened1 @winterknight

To see which is the highest transcendance

There's no highest transcendence, or levels of transcendence. That's just a trap for seekers to spend their time endlessly exercising their mind over that to avoid the truth.

6 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

@winterknightBut to squeeze the beauty out of duality and form/creation by casting it away is not God's intention.  One should embrace it and love it.   

There's no one to embrace anything, and nothing to embrace. Identification with the embracer of experience is still identification.

Nothing is cast away. Nothing is there to be cast away. There is no "God's intention." God doesn't have intentions.


Website/book/one-on-one spiritual guidance: Sifting to the Truth: A New Map to the Self

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


We must not cease from exploration and at the end of all our exploring will be to arrive at the place where we began and to know the place for the first time.       --T.S Eliot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

@winterknight

Interesting so what you are is basically full disconnection. 

Which is the exact opposite of what we are full immersion 

Edit: i posted this before i knew inlytened 1 posted his post about brown bear 

Edited by Aakash

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

 

 

Oh the secret weapon every nondual warrior must have! 😂


''Today a young man on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration, that we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively, there is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, we are the imagination of ourselves. Here's Tom with the weather''

- Bill Hicks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, winterknight said:

It's not really looping. There's no 'it' to loop.

There is no most accurate way to put it. There's no way to put it at all.

If it wasn't We weren't talking about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

@winterknight

It seems like when you say "there's no way to describe it" it is exactly that

Still within my highest state of consciousness, i could frame it using a description 

which means there's some validity to what your saying. 

What is basically happening is this 

Your statement is: 

There is no non-duality, there is no duality           You've tackled it from both ends 

What me and ilytened 1 are stating is : 

There is non-duality , there is duality                     We've tackled it from both ends too 

But you say your point is ultimately correct and true for every person, which is different to our point because it is true for who ever reaches such a stage in the enlightenment path but is essentially true for everyone anyway. The difference is who is correct about who incorporates who into their enlightenment. Do we incorporate your enlightenment in truth, or does yours incorporate ours. 

So what is the truth that is true for everyone again ? 

disclaimer: at this point in time, it would seem like you are winning the debate, in my opinion. You've given clear and decisive answers. 

Edited by Aakash

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Aakash said:

@winterknight

Interesting so what you are is basically full disconnection. 

Which is the exact opposite of what we are full immersion 

Edit: i posted this before i knew inlytened 1 posted his post about brown bear 

Not disconnection. There is nothing to be disconnected from or connected to.

34 minutes ago, Preetom said:

Oh the secret weapon every nondual warrior must have! 😂

:D

27 minutes ago, tedens said:

If it wasn't We weren't talking about it.

How true.

17 minutes ago, Aakash said:

@winterknight

Do we incorporate your enlightenment in truth, or does yours incorporate ours. 

It's really not about incorporation... 


Website/book/one-on-one spiritual guidance: Sifting to the Truth: A New Map to the Self

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

53 minutes ago, winterknight said:

Not disconnection. There is nothing to be disconnected from or connected to.

53 minutes ago, winterknight said:

It's really not about incorporation... 

 its impossible to become absolute infinity in non-duality, which is exactly what your talking about. Its just about giving the self 

its also possible to become omniscient (be absolute infinity) as an incomplete-complete complex of absolute infinity. 

both are incomplete-complete models

What you are essentially saying is you've become the god particle. Which is as you've said... there is nothing to be disconnected from or connected to. Its exactly that what ever way you look at it. 

 

I am aware of this and that is exactly why i'm trying to see where you incorporate on the model, who knows i'm  even open to myself being wrong and you actually being the most complete-incomplete-able model 

Which i'm telling you, itself is an impossible-contradiction complex. You are the finite being in the infinite being. You can not become anything except a incomplete-complete- finite-infinite-being 

Which if your reading correct, is INCOMPLETE-ABLE by design, because the god-particle is existence itself. Even becoming nothing or "that which can not be named" is within existence itself. This applies to any of us. Which means as humanity or" god humanity"... we need to map the best path for everyone. 

As a result makes omniscientcy more accurate statement of the god particle, than yours. However, your engrossment into the god particle is far deeper than anything i can word. There's no way to compare it against the depthness of omnisciency. Which i have not reached. So i'm doing my best to scale it accurately. 

in other words, regardless of how deep your enlightenment is, it is the cliche of a stage turquoise enlightened being. 

 

 

Edited by Aakash

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Preetom said:

Oh the secret weapon every nondual warrior must have! 😂

😍😍


We must not cease from exploration and at the end of all our exploring will be to arrive at the place where we began and to know the place for the first time.       --T.S Eliot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Inliytened1 said:

 

 

Did you Just pulled Brown bear card. 😂

b2eff80806067261e08f9eef8772cad4.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@winterknight 

2 hours ago, winterknight said:

It's not that my experience that is more truthful than others, but rather that I am describing what is the case for everyone in fact.

Of course what I'm saying affects everything I'm saying as well. The question is: what does that mean?

If we follow your way then it has no meaning. The quality of experience is reduced to purely perceptual rather than conceptual. All notions of doer-ship will be lost and "humanity" well be reduce to pure instinct and unconscious influence.

At least that is what i understand from your video and personal experience following that path. It does result in losing all sense of separation, but the human element is also lost.


To a fox, trickery is truthfulness. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

@winterknight The Occult and traditional Tantra disagrees and so do I. This is not an "enlightenment" truth; it is merely sectarian dogma. Experience can be a source of great beauty. Beauty is an experience. To say enlightenment is a rejection of experience is to say that enlightenment is a rejection of beauty.

Since one of my values is beauty, I do not reject the experience of it. I embrace beauty without grasping. 

I do not reject the body or the physical realm. It is ALL divine.

There is a middle path between asceticism and hedonism that leads also to enlightenment. All that wish to reject beautiful experiences may do so but not I.

Edited by Matt8800

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, FoxFoxFox said:

@winterknight If we follow your way then it has no meaning.

I'm not describing a way but a fact.

Quote

 

The quality of experience is reduced to purely perceptual rather than conceptual. 

 

Percepts are also conceptual. Experience is always both. But experience is non-existent.

Quote

 

All notions of doer-ship will be lost

 

There are no notions.

Quote

 

and "humanity" well be reduce to pure instinct and unconscious influence.

 

There is neither humanity nor influences. There never were. There aren't now.

Quote

 

At least that is what i understand from your video and personal experience following that path. It does result in losing all sense of separation, but the human element is also lost.

 

How can something be lost which never was the case to begin with?


Website/book/one-on-one spiritual guidance: Sifting to the Truth: A New Map to the Self

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Matt8800 said:

@winterknight The Occult and traditional Tantra disagrees and so do I. This is not an "enlightenment" truth; it is merely sectarian dogma. Experience can be a source of great beauty. Beauty is an experience. To say enlightenment is a rejection of experience is to say that enlightenment is a rejection of beauty.

I'm not talking about a rejection of experience or beauty. There is no one around to accept or reject.


Website/book/one-on-one spiritual guidance: Sifting to the Truth: A New Map to the Self

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

@winterknight You know what i think, i think that enlightenment is a phenomena, that cycles you outside of consciousness and all its systems. 

But may i ask, why do you still quote ad vita vendata and not look to change in any knowledge structure? 

Its just that a complete annihilation of your knowledge structure and experience. In other words its a

VOID within a VOID within a dualistic VOID within a BLACK HOLE within nowhere, no place , no time 

its the true giving up of self. 

Whereas we can fathom that your experience lies within a larger experience of god. To you, its completely nullified. 

its interesting for sure, you have most certainly reached nirvana 

However, why does someone like @foxfoxfox or @natasha not agree with you when they have experienced themselves this same pocket of space. 

its exactly this, nirvana can take the extremes of any paradigm. because its infinite and will basically resort in a lock when giving up self. 

No new knowledge is gained and no knowledge of true self is lost. 

its just not within your nature to go and help the world at, but for someone like sadhguru it is. 

Which means there's no actual difference between your enlightenmnet, your experiences which are no free will on earth was in what lead you to be locked at your enlightenment. 

Which means that, its actually dangerous as a society imo, to let people follow you. it would be more advisable to get locked at a higher level of consciousness before permanently locking out of the system. 

For example, if i permanently locked out the system at stage coral. I would be doing the exact same thing i am doing now probably. I wouldn't even quote non-duality or advita or any spiritual school of teaching. I would be quoting my contemplation. 

Therefore its as you've said, that whole issue with trying to balance non-duality and duality is only a distraction itself. Interesting, but this begs the question like @sychronicity @ fox fox fox @ natasha @ aakash @ inylightened one all think (in my relative opinion of everyone elses viewpoint) what makes you right?  

to which the answer is, you are indeed right. It just goes against our principals of humanity

This is exactly the reason i didn't like how nahm didn't learn any true metaphysics before he still managed to lock out at a higher level. Yet he's still able to keep a balance within the world of relativity. Its interesting... 

it basically concludes the answer and that is, you can lock out at which ever stage you want and that's the brillance of enlightenment. 

There are degrees of enlightenment/ consciousness, but there is only enlightenment and there is only one ultimate locking out. 

Still i must add, it has nothing to do with the god particle, it is still within the existence of the god particle. However, its the ultimate lock out. As long as you reach this lock at even at higher levels of consciousness. Your locking out at the same place, but in a different location. Still in the middle of nowhere, the most incomplete-complete god particle. However, that doesn't change the fact that there will be more "conscious" incomplete-complete god particles in the future. 

So yeah, everything makes sense

Edited by Aakash

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now