Philosophy Now Forum

I’m not responding to you again atla.

I’ve got no time for idiots ...

Genuine people yes..but not idiots.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Mar 17, 2018 9:53 pm Like I said believe what you want...you have no access to another ones inner reality..

Your world is your own creation...so your projection is meaningless to me.

I live in my world..not the world other people want me to live in.

.
There is one space.......but billions of worlds.

Don’t tell me what to think...I’ll make up my own mind .

This is not a teaching.... so forget that lie...don’t be a dozen thinker..be the sure one.

.

Wrong again. There is one shared world, one shared universe, and every human experiences this one world slightly differently. Sometimes very differently. We live our own life, surround ourselves with the people and things we want etc. Our lifestyle, our surroundings will mostly reflect the people we are, our psychology etc. But we don't literally create our own world using our mental powers, that's just basic spiritual narcissism.
And there is no real expansive space of pure love. It's just how it is, it's not anyone's fault.

It would be wonderful if such a space existed, but it doesn't, so it happens to be up to humanity to make this world a better place. And here's the catch: you are so divorced from reality that you are actually actively working against this attempt.

I’m not responding to you again atla.

Good

Dontaskme wrote:

Separation is not real....it pretends to be real...I happen to see through the pretence which allows for the real expansive space of pure love to unfold...it has no wants or needs..its whole and totally complete ....I trust that... I am that.

.
Nonduality has been the most beautiful discovery of my life...

Your passionate persistence in the face of much adverse criticism shows me that you mean what you say. My criticism is that you don't say it clearly enough.

If you can do so please tell me if nonduality includes duality. To put it another way, is nonduality a container of everything else including ideas, even including wrong ideas?

Even you I think must agree that duality has some sort of existence even if it exists only as an illusion.

Atla wrote:

But we don't literally create our own world using our mental powers, that's just basic spiritual narcissism.

Do followers of nonduality consider that monkeys and pigs and so on can and do experience nonduality?

Belinda wrote: ↑Sun Mar 18, 2018 9:18 am Dontaskme wrote:

Separation is not real....it pretends to be real...I happen to see through the pretence which allows for the real expansive space of pure love to unfold...it has no wants or needs..its whole and totally complete ....I trust that... I am that.

.
Nonduality has been the most beautiful discovery of my life...

Your passionate persistence in the face of much adverse criticism shows me that you mean what you say. My criticism is that you don't say it clearly enough.

Every Nondual speaker says it differently, no two speakers ever write it or speak it exactly alike ...although the message is the same message.

The thing is, when I say it, I understand it very clearly obviously, because I've tasted it myself...you have to taste it yourself to know it. No one can give it to you by their words alone..their words alone are their own experience...

It's like the scenery is the same one...while all the artists who are painting that scenery will paint completely different versions of the same one scenery.

There is no wrong or right way of putting the untouchable ineffable into words...but putting it into words is what's happens...it's what is...it's just oneness putting what is difficult to put into words....putting that into words...everything happens spontaneously and freely..it all inclusive.

Take what is of value, and reject what is not.

.

Belinda wrote: ↑Sun Mar 18, 2018 9:18 amIf you can do so please tell me if nonduality includes duality. To put it another way, is nonduality a container of everything else including ideas, even including wrong ideas?

Of course nonduality includes duality...there is only duality...that which is dual cannot not be dual. But duality is perceived....the perceiver is beyond duality, it's beyond the split mind of knowledge, it's that empty space in which all perceived knowledge appears.It's the knower that cannot be knowN, for it is the knowing...it's all ONE

Belinda wrote: ↑Sun Mar 18, 2018 9:18 amEven you I think must agree that duality has some sort of existence even if it exists only as a delusion.

Existence only pertains to knowledge...To the sense of a ''separate self''...otherwise there is no one to know existence exists, only that IT IS.... All knowledge is sourced in not-knowing. IS-NESS.

It's totally divine irrational nonsense....but the mind turns that nonsense around to make sense of it...as the play of duality...of knower and known.

.

Don't just blindly take my word for anything..inquire into this yourself...experience your own experience of SELF...you have to do the inquiring if you want to see oneness.

Or you can Watch Mooji and many others on youtube, ..but Mooji is very good at explaining this.

.

Belinda wrote: ↑Sun Mar 18, 2018 9:18 am
Do followers of nonduality consider that monkeys and pigs and so on can and do experience nonduality?

Nonduality is not an experience...it's this direct presence right now prior to thinking about it..thinking is duality.

Pigs and monkeys are Nondual reality..flowers are too.

Nothing lives, and nothing dies...that's nondual reality.

A pig or a monkey does not say I AM a monkey or a pig....They are I AM

Nonduality doesn't have any followers..for one very good reason...there is nothing in for them.

The one looking out of a pigs eye is the same one looking out of your eye and a monkeys eye.

The monkey, pig, human ..are all variables of the changeless ONE

.

Belinda wrote: ↑Sun Mar 18, 2018 9:18 am Atla wrote:

But we don't literally create our own world using our mental powers, that's just basic spiritual narcissism.

Do followers of nonduality consider that monkeys and pigs and so on can and do experience nonduality?

The way I understand it, nonduality is not really an experience, trying to experience nonduality is like trying to bite your own teeth with your own teeth. And yet, compared to the Western cultural consciousness-matter dualism for example, it is a very different state of being so to speak, so from that perspective, nonduality appears to be a very different and alien "experience".

But here's the thing, we can't really get to nonduality without having some sort of experience of a nondual awakening. Intellectual understanding is just not enough, some sort of experience must happen, but after that such experiences should be dropped or minimized at least. And here is where many people go wrong with nonduality, instead of dropping such stuff, they get into it more and more and eventually they go crazy.

Also, nonduality means that monkeys, pigs, rocks, electrons, and everything else including people who don't beieve in nonduality, are actually in the nondual "state". Because it's not possible not to be. Most people just don't realize it.

So it is completely unbelievable, but Western civilization has been sleepwalking for 2000+ years. Almost every person here lived and died without ever understanding what life actually is. And this is still going on today. How is this possible at all? Well, apparently the world doesn't care if most people live their entire lives in delusional states.

Atla wrote:

But here's the thing, we can't really get to nonduality without having some sort of experience of a nondual awakening.

I submit that even "awakened" humans cannot know that monkeys, pigs and other conscious entities are not awakened.

Atla, can you interpret the Garden of Eden as nonduality? I don't refer to what the authors meant by the story ;I refer to your personal interpretation.

Belinda wrote: ↑Sun Mar 18, 2018 7:16 pm I submit that even "awakened" humans cannot know that monkeys, pigs and other conscious entities are not awakened.

Well I'd rather not go into how many ways this sentence didn't make sense to me.

Atla, can you interpret the Garden of Eden as nonduality? I don't refer to what the authors meant by the story ;I refer to your personal interpretation.

Well.. yeah I was wondering about that. Maybe the fall from innocence refers to the advent of the hallucination of the seperate "I". According to my very rudimentary research, the separate "I" roughly emerged around the 2nd millenium BC, in several cultures, but maybe even sooner?

I tend to believe that the first great civilization, the Indus Valley civilisation, did not invent the "I" yet, nor did the "I" exist in the earlier times of Egypt. People only grew backs to their faces later.

Maybe later, these times were seen as the Golden Age of humanity, when man wasn't separated yet from nature, they were one and the same. But by the time the Old Testament was written, this was already history.

--------

On the other hand, it's quite probable that later, there was this half-baked nondualist guy called Jesus. This guy had a nondual awakening, but (mis)interpreted it in the context of his Judean religion. So what he was saying is that we are literally one and the same with God.

So his message was already somewhat half-baked, but then it also got misunderstood (because almost no one else understood the nondual). And his message was also censored: it was agreed upon that only Jesus is the son of God and one with God, but no else is.

Preamble to the U.S. Declaration of Independence, 1776. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their Creator, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

At one time this was seen as an expression of eternal values. Then the experts got a hold of it and prostituted the meanings of these values.

Are all men considered equal? Have eternal values assured us the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness? No, they have been prostituted into worldly struggles for prestige taking the place of opening to the inner experience of eternal values and objective conscience. It is called progress.

Atla wrote: ↑Sun Mar 18, 2018 7:50 pm Well.. yeah I was wondering about that. Maybe the fall from innocence refers to the advent of the hallucination of the seperate "I". According to my very rudimentary research, the separate "I" roughly emerged around the 2nd millenium BC, in several cultures, but maybe even sooner?

I tend to believe that the first great civilization, the Indus Valley civilisation, did not invent the "I" yet, nor did the "I" exist in the earlier times of Egypt. People only grew backs to their faces later.

Maybe later, these times were seen as the Golden Age of humanity, when man wasn't separated yet from nature, they were one and the same. But by the time the Old Testament was written, this was already history.

Maybe one could even make the argument that the greatest civilizational collapse in human history, which happened in the 12th century BC, had among many other factors, also something to do with the advent of the separate "I".

The "I" back then may have been new, very primitive, confusing, simple, and some cultures simply might have went insane because of it, went very violent, aggressive. Maybe that's one of the several factors that lead to the Sea people's idea to just destroy and take over everything. In a short time all the great cultures fell except Egypt and Assyria, and they were severely weakened too. It may have been the end of the so-called "Golden Age", the "Old World", and a great dark age followed that lasted centuries.

And so it seems to be a widespread phenomenon that the religions that came to be around the second half of the 1st millennium BC, have one common theme: they are addressing the problem of the separate "I" and the unnecessary suffering it causes.

Atla wrote: ↑Mon Mar 19, 2018 7:46 am

Atla wrote: ↑Sun Mar 18, 2018 7:50 pm Well.. yeah I was wondering about that. Maybe the fall from innocence refers to the advent of the hallucination of the seperate "I". According to my very rudimentary research, the separate "I" roughly emerged around the 2nd millenium BC, in several cultures, but maybe even sooner?

I tend to believe that the first great civilization, the Indus Valley civilisation, did not invent the "I" yet, nor did the "I" exist in the earlier times of Egypt. People only grew backs to their faces later.

Maybe later, these times were seen as the Golden Age of humanity, when man wasn't separated yet from nature, they were one and the same. But by the time the Old Testament was written, this was already history.

Maybe one could even make the argument that the greatest civilizational collapse in human history, which happened in the 12th century BC, had among many other factors, also something to do with the advent of the separate "I".

The "I" back then may have been new, very primitive, confusing, simple, and some cultures simply might have went insane because of it, went very violent, aggressive. Maybe that's one of the several factors that lead to the Sea people's idea to just destroy and take over everything. In a short time all the great cultures fell except Egypt and Assyria, and they were severely weakened too. It may have been the end of the so-called "Golden Age", the "Old World", and a great dark age followed that lasted centuries.

And so it seems to be a widespread phenomenon that the religions that came to be around the second half of the 1st millennium BC, have one common theme: they are addressing the problem of the separate "I" and the unnecessary suffering it causes.

Pray, dear colleague here Atla, tell me, what is that problem of the separate "I", and what is the unnecessary suffering it causes?

Take me for example, one Yrreg, what is my problem with the separate "I", and what is the unnecessary suffering it causes me?

Dear readers, this kind of writing with Atla is impossible to decipher, because the phraseology is so misty.

Dear Atla, suppose you just name one thing in everyday life of making a living, seeking some pleasure with food and sex, fixing some dysfunctional piece of kitchen equipment like the electric stove, and counting the money left in one's wallet and pocket at the of the day, that is the problem with a separate "I".

And what unnecessary suffering it causes the common person, like yours truly, one Yrreg.

Name an everyday suffering like in the midst of heavily everyday congested traffic in my country, with the fellow bus passenger beside me who smells bad to my sensitive nose, etc.

Do you know about how to write using words of concrete life in the existence of the human masses, so that your readers are not wondering what you are babbling all about?

Yrreg wrote: ↑Wed Mar 21, 2018 1:44 am Pray, dear colleague here Atla, tell me, what is that problem of the separate "I", and what is the unnecessary suffering it causes?

Take me for example, one Yrreg, what is my problem with the separate "I", and what is the unnecessary suffering it causes me?

Dear readers, this kind of writing with Atla is impossible to decipher, because the phraseology is so misty.

Dear Atla, suppose you just name one thing in everyday life of making a living, seeking some pleasure with food and sex, fixing some dysfunctional piece of kitchen equipment like the electric stove, and counting the money left in one's wallet and pocket at the of the day, that is the problem with a separate "I".

And what unnecessary suffering it causes the common person, like yours truly, one Yrreg.

Name an everyday suffering like in the midst of heavily everyday congested traffic in my country, with the fellow bus passenger beside me who smells bad to my sensitive nose, etc.

Do you know about how to write using words of concrete life in the existence of the human masses, so that your readers are not wondering what you are babbling all about?

Well I'd like to see you try and express it more clearly. And no I'm not writing to everyday masses here, we aren't on Facebook or 4chan, to me this is a philosophy forum. I don't mention these things to almost anyone in my everyday life, except maybe those few people who already know or suspect it.

The separate I isn't "your" problem, it means that you yourself are the problem. You are a delusional construct that doesn't realize that it doesn't really exist, other than a bunch of thoughts, impressions, memories, self-awareness etc. But there is "no one" really there behind all these things, no separate, independent center of action. As long as "you" have this belief, "you" are a form of insanity.

Instead, "we" are one and the same with the world, "our" true nature is eternal and ever present, which can relieve many people from fundamental existential terror, suffering. Because in the end there is absolutely nothing to be afraid of fundamentally. We are already there, this is it, and everything is all right, and the way it's supposed to be. Nondual realization is the end of most fundamental seeking.

We just play the roles of being this person here, and being that person there. These are important everyday roles but not to be taken to the extreme. But most of us don't know that we are playing these roles, which creates too much separation between each other and between us and nature. If we would realize our common nature, there would probably be less wars, less religios bullshit, and more cooperation in the world. Maybe this planet wouldn't even be blown up soon. And that would effect the everydays too.

And if we would realize just how fundamentally we are one with nature, maybe we would treat it too with more respect, and not like some kind of enemy that needs to be subjugated. The excessive destruction of nature is another way how our everydays are affected.

And well, a great deal of Buddhism is discussing the unnecessary suffering caused by false clinging, false identification done by the separate "I". These are very real immediate psychological effects that are mostly harmful and unnecessary.

And so on. But no, if your electric stove needs to be fixed right now, then it will hardly make a diference whether you understand the nondual or not. It also doesn't protect against bad smell.

Atla wrote:

Well I'd like to see you try and express it more clearly. And no I'm not writing to everyday masses here, we aren't on Facebook or 4chan, to me this is a philosophy forum. I don't mention these things to almost anyone in my everyday life, except maybe those few people who already know or suspect it.

But Eastern philosophies are created by people too, for practical purposes. What is impractical or high-falutin about advaita vedanta?

Everyday masses, even Facebook users, include a few people who can understand and appreciate metaphysics.

Belinda wrote: ↑Wed Mar 21, 2018 9:39 am Atla wrote:

Well I'd like to see you try and express it more clearly. And no I'm not writing to everyday masses here, we aren't on Facebook or 4chan, to me this is a philosophy forum. I don't mention these things to almost anyone in my everyday life, except maybe those few people who already know or suspect it.

But Eastern philosophies are created by people too, for practical purposes. What is impractical or high-falutin about advaita vedanta?

Everyday masses, even Facebook users, include a few people who can understand and appreciate metaphysics.

Nondualism by itself isn't really a philosophy, it's more like a fact. Roses are red. The sky is blue. The separate "I" is illusory.

Then there are some Eastern philosophies based on nondualism, like Advaita, and they usually have their own additions of crazy, but it's probably not as bad as what we have in the West.

But telling people on Facebook that the "I" is illusory is usually just self-sabotage, because the vast majority know that they are as real as it gets.

Atla wrote:

Nondualism by itself isn't really a philosophy, it's more like a fact. Roses are red. The sky is blue. The separate "I" is illusory.

Nondualism ( the vedanta philosophy meaning of the term) may be a fact whatever you mean by "fact". The dualistic aspect is fact too. Dualism and nondualism are mutually compatible.