Objections To Spirituality Mega-Thread

[Leo Gura]

2 hours ago, AleksM said:

@Leo Gura

Are you denying the existence of individual souls? Are you telling us that everybody is the same God and there is no such thing as an individual Soul? 

Depends on how you look at it.

At the highest level of consciousness a soul is none other than God. So in this sense there is no soul. All souls are just partitions in the mind of God and made of nothing.

Quote

If everybody is God, then how can God, that is perfect, be submissive to illusion? If the soul equals to God, then how can the individual Soul find itself subject to the limiting effects of illusion? Doesn't that lead to the conclusion that illusion is superior to God because it has the power to put God under illusion?

The answer to this set of questions must of course be riddled with paradox since we are now talking about the Absolute using dualiatic language.

If God is unlimited, it must be unlimited in its ability to limit itself, otherwise it would not be unlimited. If God could not constrain itself inside an illusion if its own making, that would be a limit, which contradicts its unlimitedness. This God is so all-powerful it can fool itself. Illusion is not superior to God because God wills the illusion into existence, and also because there is no difference between illusion and reality, superior and inferior. All of these differences only exist in the mind of God and nowhere else.

God IS the power of infinite illusion. Illuison IS creation! Illusion IS God's greatest power.

If you just imagine an infinite mind, you can easily see that this mind can easily imagine being a finite thing, like a table or a kangaroo or a human. Just as you as a human adult can imagine yourself to be a child. It's easy to imagine something less than you, hard to imagine something greater than you. It's hard for a donkey to imagine God, but easy for God to imagine a donkey.

[whoareyou]

@Leo Gura Why not be more straight forward about it? When people refer to "individual soul", they refer to their ego, it's that simple. In other words, because there is no self, there is also no individual soul.

 

[Leo Gura]

51 minutes ago, whoareyou said:

@Leo Gura Why not be more straight forward about it? When people refer to "individual soul", they refer to their ego, it's that simple. In other words, because there is no self, there is also no individual soul.

No, soul is not the same as ego.

These are naunced distinctions which require much spiritual experience to make.

I wouldn't make too big of a deal about it. Just shoot for transcending all dualities.

[whoareyou]

12 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

No, soul is not the same as ego.

These are naunced distinctions which require much spiritual experience to make.

I wouldn't make too big of a deal about it. Just shoot for transcending all dualities.

Ego = identification with mind, an illusion of separate self. Soul becomes another identity that the mind attaches itself to.  To majority of people in this world, a soul implies a separate self, it is one of many things they identify as.

This is one of the reasons why Buddha rejected the concept of the soul.

 

Edited November 24, 2019 by whoareyou

[Leo Gura]

Like I said, these are nuanced distinctions.

Of course from the ultimate absolute level nothing can be distinct at all, at which point soul merges into the godhead.

[mandyjw]

Soul seems to be a concept that describes the vague sense or knowledge of God or something timeless. This sense the word soul points to is uncovered to be One in this work. 

The spirit is another thing, something in between Source/God/Oneness and dualistic scattered creation. There has to be an inbetween, or you couldn't be physical and also part of the whole. 

[cetus]

The soul is the embryo of the ego. 

 

[abrakamowse]

This is what I understand according to Buddhism what "soul" is and It seems pretty accurate to me.

"The soul, or "self" is only a temporary composite of matter, sensations, perceptions, thought and consciousness that dissipates and ceases to exist at death."

 

 

[Elisabeth]

Should I really do techniques that bring up stuff? Does "shadow work" ever end? 

I'm mostly happy with my path, but sometimes I've also wondered how much it destabilizes me and if it's worth it. Kinda the "dark side of meditation/psychedelics/breathwork" question.

[Leo Gura]

33 minutes ago, abrakamowse said:

This is what I understand according to Buddhism what "soul" is and It seems pretty accurate to me.

"The soul, or "self" is only a temporary composite of matter, sensations, perceptions, thought and consciousness that dissipates and ceases to exist at death."

The whole point of the notion of a soul is that it persists between lifetimes as an intermediate structure between the human self and the Godhead.

If soul is just ego, the notion of soul isn't needed at all. The point is in its being prior to ego.

[abrakamowse]

9 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

If soul is just ego, the notion of soul isn't needed at all. The point is in its being prior to ego.

Yes, I agree with that. I am not sure what Buddha was trying to say. There's even some conversations he had with his students where they asked him what was the soul and he stayed silent.

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, abrakamowse said:

I am not sure what Buddha was trying to say.

He was speaking of total nonduality, the Godhead. From that POV, there is no need to speak of souls.

[abrakamowse]

18 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

He was speaking of total nonduality, the Godhead. From that POV, there is no need to speak of souls.

Got you. Thanks!

[Key Elements]

If it's not:

God (No-self, nothingness, no external environment, no embodiment) -->

Everythingness (You literally become everything.) -->

Godhead (Singularity, Riding the Ox Backwards) -->

To love realm -->

embodiment in mind, body, world, universe...

then, what is it? It will just be more, and more, and more, and more of everything, of absolute infinity within God. In everythingness (infinity), any part of it, the stories do not end. In other words, how long do you want the stories? It's time to find an effective way to point to God after becoming it. That's the journey. Before that, it's pursuing a profound life purpose. Not so easy to do these things, is it? 

[whoareyou]

11 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Like I said, these are nuanced distinctions.

Of course from the ultimate absolute level nothing can be distinct at all, at which point soul merges into the godhead.

 

10 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

The whole point of the notion of a soul is that it persists between lifetimes as an intermediate structure between the human self and the Godhead.

If soul is just ego, the notion of soul isn't needed at all. The point is in its being prior to ego.

 

How about dropping those mental concepts? What is the point of continuing to talk about the "ultimate absolute level", "absolute", "relative", etc?

And you still didn't get my point or what I meant by "ego" here. You can replace the word "soul" with "human", and it still still be ego - as long as person makes an identity out of it (majority do).

 

[whoareyou]

7 hours ago, Key Elements said:

If it's not:

God (No-self, nothingness, no external environment, no embodiment) -->

Everythingness (You literally become everything.) -->

Godhead (Singularity, Riding the Ox Backwards) -->

To love realm -->

embodiment in mind, body, world, universe...

then, what is it? It will just be more, and more, and more, and more of everything, of absolute infinity within God. In everythingness (infinity), any part of it, the stories do not end. In other words, how long do you want the stories? It's time to find an effective way to point to God after becoming it. That's the journey. Before that, it's pursuing a profound life purpose. Not so easy to do these things, is it? 

The next step is to drop the concepts all together, too much conceptualization is a huge problem on this forum, and the fact that the owner + mods are contributing to it, isn't helping it. 

I been saying this for years, and things don't seem to change.

[Key Elements]

@whoareyou

1 hour ago, whoareyou said:

 drop the concepts all together

It's so easy to give such an universal advice to anyone for years without understanding what the other person is saying. Whatever is written down (including what you and  I wrote down) will only be merely a story and nothing else. Words are only words, not the real thing. Of course, you're going to dismiss it and give such an advice.

I already made a decision to do my life purpose in such a way that will speak of any nuanced things in some kind of story telling way, so that those who are ready to hear it will hear it. If you speak directly to others, they will dismiss it and give you the wrong advice. It's not for everyone to hear.

At least being here in this forum made me more articulate in how to put nuanced things into words. Before, I can't really do that.

[whoareyou]

6 minutes ago, Key Elements said:

@whoareyou

It's so easy to give such an universal advice to anyone for years without understanding what the other person is saying. Whatever is written down (including what you and  I wrote down) will only be merely a story and nothing else. Words are only words, not the real thing. Of course you're going to dismiss it and give such an advice.

I am not dismissing it without understanding.

I understand what you are saying because I have been there. Concepts are helpful in the beginning, but as you go further in this journey, it is an inevitable process that the concepts would have to be dropped, in fact for a lot of people (including myself), it would even happen naturally.

To clarify this further, I take big breaks from the forum, and from time to time do check in out of interest.

Once you have a big enough of awakening, you will understand what I am saying but not just on a mental level that you are doing now.

My suggestion would be to add more sub-categories to this forum, like a beginner's section, intermediate and advanced.

[Key Elements]

@whoareyou I already said what I had to say. A life purpose would be a more appropriate place if you put it together "correctly." Do your own life purpose. Ppl will have to interact and relate to you in practical ways, and only very few or none will understand what you mean when you speak of anything nuanced.

Universal advice is inappropriate for nuanced. It's not one size fits all.

Also, in a life purpose, it could tell others (who are nuanced) how you arrived at the "conclusion." You didn't just say, "oh ok, I'm there. It's an awakening." It didn't happen like this. You had to really discover it.

[whoareyou]

13 minutes ago, Key Elements said:

@whoareyou I already said what I had to say. A life purpose would be a more appropriate place if you put it together "correctly." Do your own life purpose. Ppl will have to interact and relate to you in practical ways, and only very few or none will understand what you mean when you speak of anything nuanced.

Universal advice is inappropriate for nuanced. It's not one size fits all.

You can create many justifications or reasons for continuing to do what you are doing. Just remember the cost and the price.

Consider this hypothetical - if enough people awakened and didn't need any of this, you + many others would be out of business. 

Truth is prior to life purpose.

Yes certainly you can't give universal advice to everybody, hence why I suggested to create  sub-categories of the "enlightenment/meditation" section.

 

Edited November 25, 2019 by whoareyou