r0ckyreed

Solipsism is true at the Absolute/God level but not true in the relative/human realm because God is total and alone and God divided its experience in the relative realm, which means a dog I see has an experience similar and different from mine.

I can’t change the laws in my waking dream but I can in my sleeping dreams. For instance, I cannot awaken in this dream and then ghost through a wall but at night I can.

Thanks for that trip report. It awakened me a little bit to realize more about eternity. The girl seemed to imply that her friends were the same god as her and yet each had their own experiences. She was able to tap into them but not fully. This is what I was suggesting in that others have experiences, but it is all still within the same reality. Her insight was of Infinite Gods and not solipsism. If she said her friends were imaginary, then that would be solipsism, but she was able to tap into their experiences which is contrary to solipsism.

If others do actually have experiences, then it isn’t just a concept. If you right now are actually conscious, then your experience is more than a concept. But if you are a philosophical zombie appearing like you are conscious but really aren’t, then I would agree that others are concepts. But it seems like you, others, and my dog have a private experience that is beyond my own.

And they would also judge him for not buying any at all, saying that he has no experience to comment. But the OP does have experience of it, and therefore, OP has a right to talk about it, whereas outsiders have no authority on the matter. You get my point.

That is the million dollar question. That will vary to each person. For me, it is contemplation that raises my awareness the most. For you, it may be visualization or body scan, chakra meditation, or whatever. Just sit and notice everything just happening entirely on its own. Then, think about free will.

What does meditation mean to you? What is your meditation practice?

You imagine the boundary. That is how. A distinction is nothing but a boundary you draw. You have to draw the line somewhere; otherwise, there is nothing to discuss. Of course, all boundaries are imaginary and arbitrary.

But if everything is one and my experience is absolute, why are there other experiences that I cannot access? Why can’t I access your experience? My human experience is finite.

That’s like saying sound is purely conceptual. Sound is a concept but sound is also an experience. You are dismissing that reality is an experience and not just something you think. Your concepts are occurring in a reality of some sort. Otherwise, there is no truth to what you are saying. You ain’t gonna convince anyone that consciousness is a concept. You are conscious right now whether you are conceptualizing or not.

Not sure I understand because if you are saying difference is imaginary but sameness isn’t, then you have created a duality. If there is no other, there is no self. If there is no difference, there is no sameness. If there is no space, then there is no object. This is another contradiction. Sameness has to be imaginary because everything is always changing. There is nothing the same/identical in reality? You could say the substance is the same, but the contents are different.

Consciousness isn’t a concept. All concepts occur within Consciousness.

You aren’t getting it. The moon isnt just a pure concept. The idea of a moon points to an actual moon. Whereas the idea of Santa doesn’t point to anything in existence of actuality. For instance, Leo’s toilet isn’t just my imagination. I can go out and find Leo’s toilet. This is different from Santa Clause.

What are you meaning by state and contemplation? From my understanding, you view contemplation as deeply thinking about something and state as one’s level of consciousness.

Right. Peter Ralston discusses this in his book that contemplation is all about direct consciousness of truth. But isn’t an insight a state change? Does contemplation bring about a deeper state change than meditation? All the times I have spent counting my breaths in meditation, I could have spent contemplating a question and gaining a valuable insight. I am not sure how chanting, counting breaths, etc. will bring about the state change. Meditation makes me more blissful and contemplation makes me more insightful.

But what about contemplation and curiosity? Being present without curiosity won’t lead to awakening. This is the downside of meditation and shutting off the mind. There are plenty of dogmatic meditators who sit very presently and can access satori’s and samadhis, but this isn’t the same as complete understanding of reality. I don’t think meditation can ever lead to the highest levels of understanding because meditation encourages us to shut off the mind rather than to utilize it to explore our curiosity. Do you see how shutting off the mind is only exploring half of reality, whereas using our mind explores the other half. I am certain that contemplation leads to the highest levels of understanding because contemplation is being deeply curious. Without curiosity and contemplation, even psychedelics and the Buddha himself cannot awaken you. Awakening is a process that happens from within in the same way that medicine helps the body/mind do what it needs to do to heal from within. All meditation has ever done for me is make me feel happier and peaceful. All of my deepest insights have come from me sitting down and thinking curiously and critically about the present moment or what have you. Correct me if I am wrong, but awakening is about insight and truth rather than my happiness, suffering, and how I feel. Meditation helps more with the latter and contemplation is effective with both.

There is no such thing as a meditation technique. You are correct that meditation is a happening and not a doing. Techniques are just more doings.

Isn’t sameness also imaginary too? The mind creates difference and sameness. Separation is definitely an illusion and so are boundaries. I am with you on that, but what I am not quite with you on is this contradiction between my experience being absolute but also relative amongst other experiences. If other people have experiences like mine, then that means there are parts of reality that I, my experience, cannot access.

If we don’t exist, then why do we say “we”, “my”, and “you”? We have to draw distinctions to be able to talk about things. I could just say River but you would have no idea which river I would be talking about. I say external world to identify yourself beyond the ego. There is a seen world and an unseen world and both are the self. There is an internal world of your thoughts and feelings and private experience, and then there is a world beyond your beliefs, opinions, thoughts, feelings, and subjectivity. That is why it is called “external” because we are making a distinction relative to a certain point of view because you don’t experience all of Infinity as a finite human experience. If you did, then reality wouldn’t be infinite. There is more beyond your senses because that is what infinity is. You are a leaf on a tree in which you are tree too.

Yes. I agree but these concepts point to an actuality of some sort. Right now, my car is a concept that points to something that exists, whereas the Spaghetti Monster isn’t. My car isn’t purely conceptual. Likewise, others aren’t purely conceptual. I exist as a concept and as an actuality. The ego is concept but consciousness (what I am) isn’t.

I agree that I have only ever experienced my experience because that is all I have. You might say that my experience is reality but the issue is that if other people have experiences, then that means my experience cannot be total. My experience is completely sovereign, but it isn’t absolute because my experience only captures a small part of this Infinity. Just think about it, I see in 3D, but an alien might perceive is 3000D. Can you imagine that? Who would be God in this case? Can you see that the alien would have a totally different reality than me and could see different parts of the world that I can’t? Also, look at blind and deaf people, they can’t experience sight or sound and are thus missing out on other parts of reality. My experience right now is like that of a blind and deaf man compared to an alien. My experience is relative to others and to the Universe itself. I am not sure what you mean because this seems obvious to me that my experience is limited and not absolute. It is absolute in the sense that I cannot experience anything but my experience, but my experience also tells me there is more than just my experience. If it is true what you are saying that there is no external world and my experience is absolute, then it would follow that there are no others and that there could not be other absolutes. This contradicts Infinite Gods. It would also follow that you don’t even exist and are just my experience talking to me, which is technically true, but it would mean that you have no experience outside of my experience of “you.”

Well, according to the logic of this spiritual talk, you are technically imagining that we talked about this multiple times within this one time, the present moment.

Right there. You just acknowledged that there is more than one perspective. Idc if there are a million clones, they will all be the same but will also have different experiences in the game.

But if there are others, then it isn’t absolute because there would be experiences happening outside your own, which would make your experience relative amongst other experiences.

I believe other people are living life even if I don’t experience it. I believe cops are murdering black people even if I don’t experience it. To say otherwise is racist and inaccurate. Injustice is done around the world without my awareness. I mean look at this Gaza war. It is obviously happening while I am on the toilet drinking a root beer, typing this message.