Is it possible to materialise things into existence?

[Gesundheit2]

1 hour ago, Someone here said:

You are falling into the neo-advaita trap.this is a very reductionist and simplistic view that its almost useless

.It is not so black and white when it comes to the existence of the separate self or the ego .

There is no simple answer. I would say, both yes and then no.

We exist. Don't we? Right here in this forum  there is someone who has asked this question, and another person giving an answer. You wouldn't say that the question and the answers are illusions, would you? We are all different beings.. we are individuals. And as individuals we have a “self” that defines our individuality, resulting in a feeling of separateness. So self is real and not an illusion. If I pinch you, you will feel the pinch, not I.

What's it that makes us feel separate? What's it that gives us a feeling of self-existence and distinguishes us from others?

When we think about this very deeply, we come to understand that we are just a consciousness of some kind. This consciousness presently resides in a body and identifies itself as the body. It believes it is the body and protects the body, protects the personality. 

 

No.

1 hour ago, Someone here said:

I’ve been studying manifestation for a year now, and I’ve been able to manifest.  I’m not an expert on it yet, but here are some stuff that seems to be working for me.

The feeling, the vibration you are in, is everything it seems. When you visualize  what you want, your feelings/vibration will be completely different than what you have now. It’s usually a bit of joy at first, but more neutral, calm and confident. I think this is the secret, to channel yourself to have this vibration constantly (living in the end result). That’s also the tricky part, because you have deny the 3D physical world constantly, and remove yourself from a feeling of lack or even desiring what you want, you just have to be in a state of “I have it already, this is great.” 

It’s almost feel like im brainwashing myself at times, by denying the 3D world, and living in imagination. Pretending I have it before I have it, and not breaking character. It’s almost psychotic haha. But, you have to really buy your own dream, you know? You have to really believe and have faith that it’s already yours, that you’re already it. When you question where it is, why isn’t it here, or whatever lack, you actually cancel the spell in its process. You just have to “let it go” and believe you already have it, and don’t question it, just be it.

Because the world around you is made by you, there's a sense of intuition, or calmness with decision. Every prophet, every teacher (even me) is your subconscious playing itself out. Everything is your subconscious, and your intuition is your guidance.  If you had all the money in the world without working for it, and everything you could ever desire, I bet you would just relax and do something fun all the time. There is no work, no “I have to get this, study this, work for that,” it’s just simply “flow.” Nothing else. Just enjoying your life. So we have to look at what are the obstacles that prevent us from achieving all our dreams ..most of them are mental/psychological..not physical. 

Meh.

[Gesundheit2]

@Someone here

I might or might not go over what you said and reply to it in detail once I have more time to spare. For now, just know that you are deluded and at the opposite end of enlightenment and clarity.

[Vibroverse]

Don't get lost in Neville Goddard. 

[RMQualtrough]

3 hours ago, Someone here said:

I'm not sure that consciousness has absolutely no limits at all when It comes to logical paradox like a square circle etc .it has to be infinite. But remember..some infinities are larger than others. For example if we take all the real positive numbers ..that's infinity .yet if we include the negative real numbers ..that's also infinity. But its a "larger " infinity.  So consciousness can be infinite while at the same time have logical impossibilities like something that can't exist by it's definition because its definition is self-contradictory .like a square circle. 

I don't agree that we just have to surrender and let life flow .that should happen at the end of our life .we are young guys (me and you). I assume you are something in your late 20s or early 30s..we have some shit to do .don't you want to earn tons of money?  Fuck hot girls? Travel the world ? Buy luxury items ? Smoke a bunch of weed and go to parties with cool people? We all have dreams and desires we aspire to .and it's our job and responsibility to make them happen in the flesh .

 

You are falling into the neo-advaita trap.this is a very reductionist and simplistic view that its almost useless

.It is not so black and white when it comes to the existence of the separate self or the ego .

There is no simple answer. I would say, both yes and then no.

We exist. Don't we? Right here in this forum  there is someone who has asked this question, and another person giving an answer. You wouldn't say that the question and the answers are illusions, would you? We are all different beings.. we are individuals. And as individuals we have a “self” that defines our individuality, resulting in a feeling of separateness. So self is real and not an illusion. If I pinch you, you will feel the pinch, not I.

What's it that makes us feel separate? What's it that gives us a feeling of self-existence and distinguishes us from others?

When we think about this very deeply, we come to understand that we are just a consciousness of some kind. This consciousness presently resides in a body and identifies itself as the body. It believes it is the body and protects the body, protects the personality. 

I’ve been studying manifestation for a year now, and I’ve been able to manifest.  I’m not an expert on it yet, but here are some stuff that seems to be working for me.

The feeling, the vibration you are in, is everything it seems. When you visualize  what you want, your feelings/vibration will be completely different than what you have now. It’s usually a bit of joy at first, but more neutral, calm and confident. I think this is the secret, to channel yourself to have this vibration constantly (living in the end result). That’s also the tricky part, because you have deny the 3D physical world constantly, and remove yourself from a feeling of lack or even desiring what you want, you just have to be in a state of “I have it already, this is great.” 

It’s almost feel like im brainwashing myself at times, by denying the 3D world, and living in imagination. Pretending I have it before I have it, and not breaking character. It’s almost psychotic haha. But, you have to really buy your own dream, you know? You have to really believe and have faith that it’s already yours, that you’re already it. When you question where it is, why isn’t it here, or whatever lack, you actually cancel the spell in its process. You just have to “let it go” and believe you already have it, and don’t question it, just be it.

Because the world around you is made by you, there's a sense of intuition, or calmness with decision. Every prophet, every teacher (even me) is your subconscious playing itself out. Everything is your subconscious, and your intuition is your guidance.  If you had all the money in the world without working for it, and everything you could ever desire, I bet you would just relax and do something fun all the time. There is no work, no “I have to get this, study this, work for that,” it’s just simply “flow.” Nothing else. Just enjoying your life. So we have to look at what are the obstacles that prevent us from achieving all our dreams ..most of them are mental/psychological..not physical. 

Yay, good things to discuss

If you miss the backdrop, that is when you think that you aren't experiencing the feeling of you pinching my arm. These elements of individuality are the masks on top, they are the appearances which can go away and change.

If you take all the me-ness from me and all the you-ness from you, we are identical. It does not matter whether I'm seeing the eiffel tower while you're in Spain somewhere on a beach. Because you recognize the undercurrent of singularity on top of which is all just appearances. A "self" is one of these, because there is no thingness about you which continues from moment to moment. It's constantly shifting.

You see that? Imagine you turn on the TV and these words are on it.

The way your mind is currently operating is quite focused and zoomed in. So you are staring at the words on the screen. If you are so focused on the words that you only see the words, it can be right there staring you in the face telling you it's a screen, but you won't notice it because you are too focused on the words which are only appearances on it.

The hard drugs and such people use for total ego death, it is like zooming outwards so that instead of just seeing the words, you see that the words are the screen, and notice the screen itself which was always there but you had not paid attention to. And when you notice the screen, you recognize the total singularity of everything. Because everything is just reality itself......

Reality is you, and it is what is observing the pinch when you pinch me. And it is what is currently observing whatever you're seeing, and whatever I'm seeing.

[RMQualtrough]

^ That is also why spiritual practices etc are meaningless and kinda BS, by the way. You recognize this immediately. Because it doesn't matter AT ALL how good or bad a person has been in their lives, they are still the screen. It doesn't matter WHAT you fucking do because ANYTHING and EVERYTHING is the screen. There IS nothing else but that, and so everything and everyone is completely and utterly equivalent with absolutely no superiority or inferiority between anything. A monk and a child killer. Completely utterly equal because they are both just reality itself.

The idea of manifestation, calling the shots. I suppose it is like you think you are words on that screen (the words here are our individual selves, the egos, ya dig?), and you expect the word to somehow be able to control the screen. But it can't because it is only a word. It is only an appearance on the screen... A word on the screen can't become enlightened. This is another thing people think in the same vein, that when they die (the word goes away) somehow they will get to keep some aspect of their spiritual progress. How can a word have "spiritual progress"? The word is just an image. You are already whole and complete because you are reality itself. You are already enlightened because there is only reality itself and reality can only ever BE itself. Perhaps your word is not enlightened, but a word can't ever be enlightened or not enlightened anyway. Only the screen can be enlightened, or more accurately, recognize itself. Because it's the only thing there is.

The WORD does not recognize the screen and never could. Only the screen recognizes the screen. The same thing which recognizes the words.

Nothing to achieve, nowhere to go. This is what neo-advaita people parrot as a religious faith, I think mostly without having recognized the screen? So they are looking at words on the screen and accepting it to be the truth, without recognizing the screen. The teachings are words on the screen (I think this is what Leo means by saying Buddhism is part of the dream etc). All the sex you crave and the money you want, all of these desires and all of the experiences of them are images on the screen............. ONLY the screen can recognize the screen, and the screen can only be recognized by not focusing on the images.

Edited August 7, 2022 by RMQualtrough

[AtheisticNonduality]

@RMQualtrough I'd say the words are what we're talking about when we speak of enlightenment. Reality is the same whether it's in non-enlightenment or enlightenment, so obviously Reality is not the only standard for awakening. Awakening is when the words, or those aspects of existence which have actual formed substance, attain awareness / recognition. Reality does not require self-recognition unless it is enlightened, and we understand a process of unenlightened ignorance up to enlightened wakefulness, otherwise there's no reason to discuss any of this.

[RMQualtrough]

6 minutes ago, AtheisticNonduality said:

@RMQualtrough I'd say the words are what we're talking about when we speak of enlightenment. Reality is the same whether it's in non-enlightenment or enlightenment, so obviously Reality is not the only standard for awakening. Awakening is when the words, or those aspects of existence which have actual formed substance, attain awareness / recognition. Reality does not require self-recognition unless it is enlightened, and we understand a process of unenlightened ignorance up to enlightened wakefulness, otherwise there's no reason to discuss any of this.

Well they're bullshitting. Reality is NEVER in "non-enlightenment". You go away when "enlightenment" happens and that recognition of what always is/was is what people term as enlightenment. In some traditions they use "awareness" as the vehicle to help people search, and with that wording, obviously the only thing which can recognize awareness is awareness. But people think awareness is a thing when it is written like this...

All you're doing is slowly releasing your focus on the images on the screen until you see that the screen is the only thing there is and ever was.

Nobody and nothing is inferior/superior because there is no "else". Just screen. Just reality. That's all there is. That's why none of your efforts to be a good person matter, because you're not a person being good, you're goodness appearing on a screen. And a bad person is badness appearing on a screen. But there is only ever just the screen. Reality itself is the only thing there is, and it is both the kindest person and the most evil. And when the person-ness is taken away from the saint and the sinner, there is no longer any difference between them, because there is only reality itself and they are that........

[AtheisticNonduality]

@RMQualtrough This is a language issue primarily, yet it also bleeds into you depersonalizing the world (and you as a word are taking away the person-ness of the world, which is a set of words). The screen as only itself without any words does not care if it exists in an enlightened state or not; that's something the words rearrange themselves into. A variety of reinterpretations can then happen, like what you're doing right now by denying hierarchies/dualities like good vs. bad, saints vs. sinners, etc.

Edited August 7, 2022 by AtheisticNonduality

[RMQualtrough]

5 minutes ago, AtheisticNonduality said:

@RMQualtrough This is a language issue primarily, yet it also bleeds into you depersonalizing the world (and you as a word are taking away the person-ness of the world, which is a set of words). The screen as only itself without any words does not care if it exists in an enlightened state or not; that's something the words rearrange themselves into. A variety of reinterpretations can then happen, like what you're doing right now by denying hierarchies/dualities like good vs. bad, saints vs. sinners, etc.

It's not a language issue at all. Reality doesn't care if it's enlightened, it has no choice but to be, since it's itself and singular and absolutely completely whole. It can't NOT be "enlightened". You only want to believe that good people and bad people are different, or that your lifetime efforts to be good will come with some sort of end result that differs from the end result Adolf Hitler would receive. It's BS and false.

This is not only "mystical" talk, it is also a logical inevitability. Everything that exists is existence itself. That is absolute total unity and oneness. Every single thing that is, is just it.

When the images go away, like the monk's monkness, and the murderer's rape/killing of children, there is no longer any monk or murderer. It's just reality. They are both just reality. This is uncomfortable but it is not only an experiential truth in ego death, it is also a logical fact.

[AtheisticNonduality]

14 minutes ago, RMQualtrough said:

When the images go away, like the monk's monkness, and the murderer's rape/killing of children, there is no longer any monk or murderer. It's just reality. They are both just reality. This is uncomfortable but it is not only an experiential truth in ego death, it is also a logical fact.

The monk's monkness and the murderer's rape/killing of children are identical in the way they are both absolute existence, and yet they are different things. That's why this is a language issue. For a reductio ad absurdum, think of mathematical truths like one does not equal two or three does not equal four. Ultimately, absolutely, they do equal each other, and yet they don't. The reason the ultimate absolute level is appearing so profound is because you were operating under the relative for so long that you "forgot" about the absolute, and now the undeniable divinity and fundamentality of the absolute is making you sway your language to that side; but both definitions are just definitions.

[RMQualtrough]

11 minutes ago, AtheisticNonduality said:

The monk's monkness and the murderer's rape/killing of children are identical in the way they are both absolute existence, and yet they are different things. That's why this is a language issue. For a reductio ad absurdum, think of mathematical truths like one does not equal two or three does not equal four. Ultimately, absolutely, they do equal each other, and yet they don't. The reason the ultimate absolute level is appearing so profound is because you were operating under the relative for so long that you "forgot" about the absolute, and now the undeniable divinity and fundamentality of the absolute is making you sway your language to that side; but both definitions are just definitions.

Different, but like this:

Like how the word "this" is a different word to "screen".

But to actually get at what I was sayin in the post much further up, you have to zoom out and see that there is just a screen and images are just images.

And like the words there, desires and experiences are images. So OP's desire to make lots of money, all of that. It is an image like everything else. And the pain from being pinched. It is all the same as such. Wishing to manifest something is itself an idea and all things which are things are images themselves.

[AlterEgo]

3 hours ago, Vibroverse said:

Don't get lost in Neville Goddard. 

Too late.  Why do you say that?  I've been applying Neville's teachings for awhile now, and it's brought me fantastic results so far.  "Effectiveness is the Measure of Truth"

[AtheisticNonduality]

@RMQualtrough I would argue permanence (the screen) and impermanence (the screen as words) are equally real.

[Juressic]

On 8/4/2022 at 0:00 AM, Someone here said:

my question summarised : what is preventing me from imaging a unicorn into existence just by thinking about it ? Is it the laws of this universe?  But are these laws really "real"?  Doesn't that prove that there is an objective external reality that is independent of our mind /consciousness/Imagining? 

Life is preventing us, but what is life... isn't it one point in infinity where boring loops are happening.. maybe we are stucked, but hey, I really don't want any unicorns here, this loop is our home, I'll cuddle some unicorns on venturing in my dreams ?

[Gesundheit2]

11 hours ago, Someone here said:

You are falling into the neo-advaita trap.this is a very reductionist and simplistic view that its almost useless

Neo-Advaita is the belief that no practice is required to understand one's true nature. It is exactly what you are doing, and it's leading you off-track.

Neo-Advaita is different from Advaita Vedanta in that Vedanta emphasizes on practice and direct recognition more than simple arm-chair philosophy.

11 hours ago, Someone here said:

.It is not so black and white when it comes to the existence of the separate self or the ego .

Oh, but it is so black and white. The ego does not exist. Period. It is an illusion. An appearance on the screen of consciousness. Have you not ever seen that picture of waves in the ocean?

11 hours ago, Someone here said:

There is no simple answer. I would say, both yes and then no.

Because you don't know what you're talking about. You don't have direct recognition of the truth, only ideas that you've collected from other people.

11 hours ago, Someone here said:

We exist. Don't we? Right here in this forum  there is someone who has asked this question, and another person giving an answer. You wouldn't say that the question and the answers are illusions, would you? We are all different beings.. we are individuals. And as individuals we have a “self” that defines our individuality, resulting in a feeling of separateness. So self is real and not an illusion. If I pinch you, you will feel the pinch, not I.

So many confused ideas here, and a lack of linguistic awareness. Examine each word of them on its own, examine them deeply and don't just throw answers mindlessly or brush off the inquiry too early if you don't find an answer. Maybe you're not supposed to find an answer. Maybe you're supposed to find exactly nothing.

What is a "we" or an "I"? Who is thinking those thoughts? Who is asking the question? etc.

Basically, you need to practice self-inquiry. How many hours of practice have you put in so far?

11 hours ago, Someone here said:

What's it that makes us feel separate? What's it that gives us a feeling of self-existence and distinguishes us from others?

The ego. Thoughts. Confused ideas.

11 hours ago, Someone here said:

When we think about this very deeply, we come to understand that we are just a consciousness of some kind. This consciousness presently resides in a body and identifies itself as the body. It believes it is the body and protects the body, protects the personality.

It is not consciousness that makes us feel separate. It's the ego. Consciousness is not the ego. Consciousness is the screen on which the ego appears and disappears.

Consciousness is our primary identity. Ego is secondary relative to consciousness, and so it's not necessary or true for consciousness. Which is why it is considered illusory. Because it can change and morph and everything, while consciousness remains the same.

You can identify with the ego if you want. But who/what is this "You" that can identify? It's consciousness, not ego. And that's the point.

11 hours ago, Someone here said:

I’ve been studying manifestation for a year now, and I’ve been able to manifest.  I’m not an expert on it yet, but here are some stuff that seems to be working for me.

The feeling, the vibration you are in, is everything it seems. When you visualize  what you want, your feelings/vibration will be completely different than what you have now. It’s usually a bit of joy at first, but more neutral, calm and confident. I think this is the secret, to channel yourself to have this vibration constantly (living in the end result). That’s also the tricky part, because you have deny the 3D physical world constantly, and remove yourself from a feeling of lack or even desiring what you want, you just have to be in a state of “I have it already, this is great.” 

It’s almost feel like im brainwashing myself at times, by denying the 3D world, and living in imagination. Pretending I have it before I have it, and not breaking character. It’s almost psychotic haha. But, you have to really buy your own dream, you know? You have to really believe and have faith that it’s already yours, that you’re already it. When you question where it is, why isn’t it here, or whatever lack, you actually cancel the spell in its process. You just have to “let it go” and believe you already have it, and don’t question it, just be it.

Because the world around you is made by you, there's a sense of intuition, or calmness with decision. Every prophet, every teacher (even me) is your subconscious playing itself out. Everything is your subconscious, and your intuition is your guidance.  If you had all the money in the world without working for it, and everything you could ever desire, I bet you would just relax and do something fun all the time. There is no work, no “I have to get this, study this, work for that,” it’s just simply “flow.” Nothing else. Just enjoying your life. So we have to look at what are the obstacles that prevent us from achieving all our dreams ..most of them are mental/psychological..not physical. 

What have you been able to manifest so far? Not that I'm curious or anything, cuz I already know the answer will not be coherent, let alone significant.

[Someone here]

10 hours ago, RMQualtrough said:

^ That is also why spiritual practices etc are meaningless and kinda BS, by the way. You recognize this immediately. Because it doesn't matter AT ALL how good or bad a person has been in their lives, they are still the screen. It doesn't matter WHAT you fucking do because ANYTHING and EVERYTHING is the screen. There IS nothing else but that, and so everything and everyone is completely and utterly equivalent with absolutely no superiority or inferiority between anything. A monk and a child killer. Completely utterly equal because they are both just reality itself.

The idea of manifestation, calling the shots. I suppose it is like you think you are words on that screen (the words here are our individual selves, the egos, ya dig?), and you expect the word to somehow be able to control the screen. But it can't because it is only a word. It is only an appearance on the screen... A word on the screen can't become enlightened. This is another thing people think in the same vein, that when they die (the word goes away) somehow they will get to keep some aspect of their spiritual progress. How can a word have "spiritual progress"? The word is just an image. You are already whole and complete because you are reality itself. You are already enlightened because there is only reality itself and reality can only ever BE itself. Perhaps your word is not enlightened, but a word can't ever be enlightened or not enlightened anyway. Only the screen can be enlightened, or more accurately, recognize itself. Because it's the only thing there is.

The WORD does not recognize the screen and never could. Only the screen recognizes the screen. The same thing which recognizes the words.

Nothing to achieve, nowhere to go. This is what neo-advaita people parrot as a religious faith, I think mostly without having recognized the screen? So they are looking at words on the screen and accepting it to be the truth, without recognizing the screen. The teachings are words on the screen (I think this is what Leo means by saying Buddhism is part of the dream etc). All the sex you crave and the money you want, all of these desires and all of the experiences of them are images on the screen............. ONLY the screen can recognize the screen, and the screen can only be recognized by not focusing on the images.

I like the analogy of the words on the screen. If by the words you mean individual egos .and by the screen you mean our true ultimate nature as pure consciousness itself .that can never die.was never born .doesn't come from anywhere and doesn't go anywhere. It's always in its eternal static absolute state which is not even a "state " but again, that's the limits of language. 

However, you still create a subtle duality with this analogy..that is ..of the words AND the screen .its like we have two things here .and nondual understanding says that there is only one thing in existence. Which is existence itself with no divisions .

So we must at the ultimate analysis agree that the words are indistinguishable from the screen . And the words can awaken to their ultimate nature as just pure screen.because the screen is reality. Like what Robert Adams says "all appearance are like moving pictures on the eternal screen of consciousness "

When it comes to manifesting things into existence..we first have to have some degree of awakening. To recognize that we are absolutely infinite. And everything that we ever wanted is already contained in infinity. But we have to tap into our infinite power and infinite intelligence to be able to manifest our dreams .

And finally i will just leave this quote here by Robert Adams "

 

[Someone here]

3 hours ago, Gesundheit2 said:

Neo-Advaita is the belief that no practice is required to understand one's true nature. It is exactly what you are doing, and it's leading you off-track.

Neo-Advaita is different from Advaita Vedanta in that Vedanta emphasizes on practice and direct recognition more than simple arm-chair philosophy

Neo-advaita is the branch of spirituality that focuses too much on the Buddhist concept of anatman or "no self ". Some modern teachers of this style of spirituality are people like Tony parsons and Jim Newman and @VeganAwake.

3 hours ago, Gesundheit2 said:

Oh, but it is so black and white. The ego does not exist. Period. It is an illusion. An appearance on the screen of consciousness. Have you not ever seen that picture of waves in the ocean?

Again ..it depends on how do you define the ego .If you define it as a unicorn then it doesn’t exist .however if you define it as the body-mind organism .then it does exist. Without an ego..you wouldn't even know who's shoes to put on in the morning. You 

3 hours ago, Gesundheit2 said:

Because you don't know what you're talking about. You don't have direct recognition of the truth, only ideas that you've collected from other people

Obviously you don't know me and how spiritualy developed I am. And I'm gonna prove this right now by not even engaging in this "I'm right ,you are wrong " childish debate that you are trying to push me towards. 

3 hours ago, Gesundheit2 said:

What is a "we" or an "I"? Who is thinking those thoughts? Who is asking the question? etc.

Basically, you need to practice self-inquiry. How many hours of practice have you put in so far?

Again you are falling into neo advaita nonsense with these kind of questions .I think it's ridiculous to police ourselves to such a degree that we avoid any use of words like "we " and "me "..these words exist in all languages in the worlds because they are corresponding to something. 

3 hours ago, Gesundheit2 said:

It is not consciousness that makes us feel separate. It's the ego. Consciousness is not the ego. Consciousness is the screen on which the ego appears and disappears.

Consciousness is our primary identity. Ego is secondary relative to consciousness, and so it's not necessary or true for consciousness. Which is why it is considered illusory. Because it can change and morph and everything, while consciousness remains the same.

You can identify with the ego if you want. But who/what is this "You" that can identify? It's consciousness, not ego. And that's the point.

Quote

You are creating a duality here .ego VS consciousness  .the ego IS consciousness. Since there is only one substance out of which everything is made. 

3 hours ago, Gesundheit2 said:

What have you been able to manifest so far? Not that I'm curious or anything, cuz I already know the answer will not be coherent, let alone significant.

I manifested online friends. A job offer .and good grades in my university course.

it works like magic. You just have to believe in it that it's already done. You don't have to be desparate for the wish you had asked or doubt on it, just feel it that it's already yours and detach yourself by handing your wish to the Universe  . That's how it works. 

 

[amanen]

11 hours ago, RMQualtrough said:

Different, but like this:

Like how the word "this" is a different word to "screen".

But to actually get at what I was sayin in the post much further up, you have to zoom out and see that there is just a screen and images are just images.

And like the words there, desires and experiences are images. So OP's desire to make lots of money, all of that. It is an image like everything else. And the pain from being pinched. It is all the same as such. Wishing to manifest something is itself an idea and all things which are things are images themselves.

You are still making a distinction between the "screen" and the "images in it", as if they are separate things. They are the same thing. Life is not like a movie that cannot be changed that is predetermined that you just watch.

You also have to keep in mind that at this level of consciousness distinctions do matter, and that consciousness is capable of producing apparent distinctions, even though at the ultimate highest level they do not exist. Ignoring distinctions at the regular level of consciousness would be complete nonsense and lead to a lot of unnecessary suffering.

[Gesundheit2]

1 hour ago, Someone here said:

Again ..it depends on how do you define the ego .If you define it as a unicorn then it doesn’t exist .however if you define it as the body-mind organism .then it does exist. Without an ego..you wouldn't even know who's shoes to put on in the morning. You 

What dictionary are you using that defines the ego as such? 

Here's what the word "ego" actually means: https://www.britannica.com/topic/ego-philosophy-and-psychology

"ego, in psychoanalytic theory, that portion of the human personality which is experienced as the “self” or “I” and is in contact with the external world through perception."

There's no "body organism" in that definition, and I challenge you to come up with one dictionary that states otherwise.

The word ego is merely a reference to a psychological phenomenon that does not exist in the real world. But feel free to create your own dictionary and talk with yourself.

1 hour ago, Someone here said:

Obviously you don't know me and how spiritualy developed I am. And I'm gonna prove this right now by not even engaging in this "I'm right ,you are wrong " childish debate that you are trying to push me towards. 

You are deeply wrong. Sorry, but there's no way around it. And the earlier you come to terms with this fact, the better.

You are not awake to your true nature, and all you have ever done is philosophy, not spiritual practice.

1 hour ago, Someone here said:

Again you are falling into neo advaita nonsense with these kind of questions .I think it's ridiculous to police ourselves to such a degree that we avoid any use of words like "we " and "me "..these words exist in all languages in the worlds because they are corresponding to something. 

Nobody is policing you. You just don't want to do the practices, e.g. self-inquiry, and you want to continue with your arm-chair philosophy instead.

And I'm not against using dualistic language. In fact, I'm all for that. I use any words that I like, if you ever notice. The difference between you and me is that you are not aware of what you are saying. You simply don't know what you're talking about.

To think that I was in any way trying to oppose the use of dualistic language is an indicator of where you are coming from and your lack of practice and understanding. Again, how many hours of self-inquiry have you put in so far? I don't need the answer. I'm just trying to show you how greatly you are overestimating yourself and your understanding.

1 hour ago, Someone here said:

You are creating a duality here .ego VS consciousness  .the ego IS consciousness. Since there is only one substance out of which everything is made. 

The ego is not consciousness. Anyone with any level of understanding realizes this fact.

Sure, you might say that the ego is made of consciousness, but it is not and never will be consciousness itself. The part is not the whole.

And by the way, this duality is not of my creation. It's in language itself. It only makes sense to use two words to refer to two different things. Otherwise, let's all just use one word for everything and be done with all of language.

1 hour ago, Someone here said:

I manifested online friends. A job offer .and good grades in my university course.

it works like magic. You just have to believe in it that it's already done. You don't have to be desparate for the wish you had asked or doubt on it, just feel it that it's already yours and detach yourself by handing your wish to the Universe  . That's how it works. 

I think that you're talking about the law of attraction, and you seem to rather have a vague/naïve understanding of how it works. It doesn't matter much to me, as long as it's convincing to you that it is working and giving you results.

[Someone here]

1. 16 minutes ago, Gesundheit2 said:

   What dictionary are you using that defines the ego as such? 

   Here's what the word "ego" actually means: https://www.britannica.com/topic/ego-philosophy-and-psychology

   "ego, in psychoanalytic theory, that portion of the human personality which is experienced as the “self” or “I” and is in contact with the external world through perception."

   There's no "body organism" in that definition, and I challenge you to come up with one dictionary that states otherwise.

   The word ego is merely a reference to a psychological phenomenon that does not exist in the real world. But feel free to create your own dictionary and talk with yourself.

Sorry I'm not playing this "dictionary" game .the ego is simply the sense of separate self. That Is well known in all spiritual circles. And the neo-advaita teaches that the ego is completely illusory. And that's simply false .

I choose the words, then I type them out on my keyboard.Then I edit and hit post.It was all me.it certainly seems like I am doing all this.But is that really true?How did I choose this answer? I don’t know.Why do these words occur to me? I don’t know.How do I move my fingers on the keyboard to type this out? I don’t know that either.Somehow, someway all of it is just happened. And yet, the  neo advaita  nonsense teaches that this Self doesn't exist .This is the great misunderstanding: it’s not whether the self exists, but rather what is the nature of the real self?

Clearly, there is something or someone here that is aware of what is happening, of words being thought and written.Call it awareness, consciousness, or knowing.

And this is the distinction:

The true you is the awareness that observes every thought, feeling, sensation, and experience.

This awareness isn’t anything in and of itself: it has no color, sound, smell, taste, or feeling.

It is formless and invisible.

And yet it’s there.

22 minutes ago, Gesundheit2 said:

You are deeply wrong. Sorry, but there's no way around it. And the earlier you come to terms with this fact, the better.

You are not awake to your true nature, and all you have ever done is philosophy, not spiritual practice

OK.

22 minutes ago, Gesundheit2 said:

Nobody is policing you. You just don't want to do the practices, e.g. self-inquiry, and you want to continue with your arm-chair philosophy instead.

And I'm not against using dualistic language. In fact, I'm all for that. I use any words that I like, if you ever notice. The difference between you and me is that you are not aware of what you are saying. You simply don't know what you're talking about.

To think that I was in any way trying to oppose the use of dualistic language is an indicator of where you are coming from and your lack of practice and understanding. Again, how many hours of self-inquiry have you put in so far? I don't need the answer. I'm just trying to show you how greatly you are overestimating yourself and your understanding

I think it's time to tell you to go get wasted because you are talking about me and what I know and what I don't know based on what?  Do you know me ?I don't even have to prove to you how much spiritual work I did because it's unimaginable amounts. And it's something you will never comprehend. I have fully deconstructed my entire sense of reality and all of my false beliefs until all  I'm left with is pure Truth . So spare me your "I'm better than you, you don't know, but I know " silly little game because I'm not gonna engage in this BS .and don't reply me to this post because I'm not gonna waste my time responding to you once again because you don't care about truth or understanding. All you care about is being right and debating endlessly. 

28 minutes ago, Gesundheit2 said:

The ego is not consciousness. Anyone with any level of understanding realizes this fact.

Sure, you might say that the ego is made of consciousness, but it is not and never will be consciousness itself. The part is not the whole.

And by the way, this duality is not of my creation. It's in language itself. It only makes sense to use two words to refer to two different things. Otherwise, let's all just use one word for everything and be done with all of language.

The ego is consciousness. Since everything is consciousness. Full stop .nothing more needs to be added .

29 minutes ago, Gesundheit2 said:

I think that you're talking about the law of attraction, and you seem to rather have a vague/naïve understanding of how it works. It doesn't matter much to me, as long as it's convincing to you that it is working and giving you results

Again I have to tell you to stop your arrogant ass tone (you don't know me ).so spare me again your judgement of my understanding. 

Yes I'm talking about the law of attraction. It works. What you send out is what you get back. Your frequency determines the reality you will experience. Your vibration of being activates the Law of Attraction in a specific way, making the things in your life appear a certain way, as a reflection of what you "send out ".

Don't reply to this post (or do if you wish ).because I'm not gonna continue playing your stupid little game of trying to outsmart each others.