r0ckyreed

Everyone who is a materialist or anti-materialist needs to ask the question, what is physical? Every idealist or anti-idealist needs to ask the question, what is mind? Notice that they are identical. Physical = Mental

I still don’t understand the difference. Materialism says everything is physical and idealism says all is mental. It is like saying reality is all object or all subject. Notice how they are both pointing to the same thing, just two identical ways to look at reality.

What do you say about people with aphantasia?

They already are!

But self-deception is always inherent in the human experience even after awakening. Awakening doesn’t eliminate self-deception.

That’s an interesting point to ponder. God is already all-knowing so the God within is already awake. I guess awakening in this sense is more about re-membering its true nature as opposed to “knowing.” I will contemplate whether this is true. I don’t wanna strip awakening down to memory or knowledge because that’s too simplistic.

We are arguing here over concepts and their meaning. By your definitions, then I meant to say paradox instead of contradiction. All paradoxes are contradictions but not all contradictions are paradoxes. Life is a paradox, a type of contradiction, because it holds everything and results in a strange loop. Tell me how God inventing itself isn’t a contradiction or “paradox.” Existence is the ultimate paradox because it is self-existing, self-creating. EDIT: I understand that contradiction/paradox is an imposition into reality and is relative to our logical, linear way of thinking about reality. However, given this, I still would suggest that reality appears paradoxical because it is purely magical.

Thanks for your clarification. But how does something die if it never existed in the first place? My thoughts are that the ego is identity that was imagined/created, so it was technically “born” and technically exists. But this doesn’t answer to the fact that you still have an ego even after “awakening.” Hence, you still have to play these ego games of survival. You are still maintaining an attachment to form and all attachment is ego right?

Right. This is where I am coming from that awakening via death is speculation. We assume that there is something after death and that death actually happens. We can also assume that there is an afterlife or no afterlife. We are in this assumption game no matter what we do. How can you be fully awake if you are still in the human form? As we know from direct experience, the human form is limited, finite, and full of self-deception. Our human brain cannot even begin to comprehend a fraction of God. The part cannot grasp the whole. In order for the part to grasp the whole, it has to become the whole. But if that happens, there is no longer any part. If you “awaken” to the whole of God and then come back as a part, then you will be missing the understanding of wholeness because a part has to deal with self-deception survival games to maintain the identity of a part. That’s what people don’t get here is that you haven’t awakened fully because you still have to focus on survival to maintain selfishness to some degree. It’s impossible to be fully awake to Absolute God because God is Absolute Selflessness. God is too profound to be comprehendable by the human brain. God is infinite which means no matter how far your understanding of God goes, you won’t be any closer to the end than when you began. Your understanding will still be at an ant level even after all of your psychedelic/meditation trips.

That is always a possibility, but contradiction is a feature of nonduality.

Notice that “awakening, enlightenment, solipsism” are indeed all concepts, speculation, and theory at a certain state of consciousness. At another state, they are direct. I am just stating that these concepts are filled with hidden preconceived ideas associated with them. The idea that you can awaken is an idea right now until you actually awaken, which you would be too dead to even have anymore ideas of it if you actually awaken totally.

I see your point, but I was referring to that it depends on your point of reference. The idea that you can awaken from this dream is an assumption because I believe it is true without direct evidence. We can’t really live life without assumptions. You are gonna assume either way or another. Your assumption is that you can actually awaken from the dream while yet still being inside the dream. I think you can be awake in the dream but I don’t see how you can awaken from the dream and live to tell the tale. Because as you start telling the tale, you are back in the dream. Do you follow? Awakening from the dream entirely is the same physical death. In the meantime, we can only be as awake as our biology allows us to.

The idea that enlightenment will eliminate suffering and all of your problems is a false teaching. True Enlightenment has nothing to do petty human needs and suffering. Enlightenment is a state of consciousness beyond human and identity. Another false teaching is that everyone is already enlightened.

No.

Interesting. That has not been my experience. I ask questions and they tell me to just have faith and trust in God. They also give more conceptual stories, but a lot of times dogmatic people want you to stunt your curiosity. If more people questioned their religion and those conceptual stories, it would be a damnation for the church. Silencing the mind has its benefits, but the deepest insights I have attained came from being curious and asking questions and not from silencing that. The only thing I have attained from a silent mind is serenity but that doesn’t compete with the feeling of awe and connection I felt when I let my curiosity and mind wander in wonder.

I would say LoA isn’t necessarily a false teaching. It has many truths to it. But I think if you take it to its extreme and misunderstand it as being able to think the reality you want, then it would be false. LoA is basically like CBT in that our thoughts influence and create our reality. But what is meant by that statement is often misunderstood. Thinking alone doesn’t manifest but our actions, which often times are influenced by a frequency of thought if you think about it. War exists because there is a negative thought/belief that is being acted upon.

One of Sadhguru’s best teachings I’ve heard is him challenging Buddha’s conclusion on desire being the root of suffering and people wanting to silence their minds. He said that the best way to silence your mind is physical death. Hands down. Another false teaching is telling students to stop asking questions because it is monkeymind and to just sit in silence because “thinking is bad.” I can see how this can be interpreted in multiple ways, but sometimes it reminds me of religion where followers are encouraged to just take your word and not question the teachings but it is by questioning the teachings that makes you stronger and deepen your understanding/growth.

Another false teaching that stands out to me is that Buddha says desire is root of suffering, but I would say it is unfulfilled desire and ignorance that are the root of suffering. The Hindus got it right with avidya leading to maya, which leads to duhka. Buddhism oversimplifies desire when in reality desire is like a tool that can be used for good or for evil. Desire can turn into greed if you aren’t careful and desire can also turn into love. How can you truly love reality if you don’t desire? That is the ultimate paradox in Buddhism. It is like saying you love your girlfriend but don’t desire her. Both go together. If you don’t love life, then by essence, you are saying that you don’t desire to live. Notice that you can say you have no desire to live, but that isn’t the same thing as actually having no desire to live. If you truly had no desire to live, then why is your body and mind fighting so hard to keep you alive? If you truly had no desire, then you would just die right now. Unhealthy desire leads to greed and devilry. But unhealthy detachment leads to apathy and depression. It is possible to be healthily detached to some degrees but it is unhealthy detachment if you are detaching yourself from your spirit, your will/purpose for living. Buddhism overlooks the importance of ambition and purpose.

I already am. Awakening doesn’t take “work”, it takes love, an insight and change in consciousness. I think people here aren’t understanding the point of this thread. It is to point out false teachings and traps. No matter how awake you are, you still have a lot of BS belief systems from false teachings and traps. Deconstructing Buddhism isn’t enough. The entire spiritual matrix is filled with BS false teachings that have infiltrated your mind. I have already listed some that I discovered on Actualized.org and I will list from other teachers as well. What separates Actualized from other teachers is that Leo is evolving whereas I don’t really see anything new with Sadhguru or Mooji, just the same old fluff from 10 years ago repackaged. Just because you have Truth doesn’t mean you are devoid of falsehood.

But there are false awakenings just like how there are false insights. The I is the only thing that exists, which brings me to another false teaching and that is of no-self. Obviously the self exists because the Self is imagining it in the first place just like all of reality. No difference. Separation is an illusion and yet the illusion still exists. Self = Consciousness. There is no such thing as Not Consciousness

What are some other false teachings you heard? One that comes to mind is “all roads lead to Nirvana.”

Exactly! Awakening must contradict itself at the deepest levels if reality is indeed a strange loop. One Truth and Infinity of Truths are the same. I guess that might be where the Infinity Gods idea comes in.

Not sure what you are referring to. All of what I uncovered came from the opposite of theory. I contemplated contradictions I noticed. I have been doing spiritual practices for many years. I have come to the conclusion from my own direct experience that the only thing you can ever know and experience is Experience itself. Awakening, enlightenment, solipsism, etc. are all speculations, theory, and concepts. I have discovered that True Awakening for me is realizing that the search for enlightenment is a joke because enlightenment is nothing but remembering who I am, that I am the way, the highest truth, and the life. Enlightenment is recognition of this, as well as experiencing Absolute Beauty and Intelligence right now. A mystical experience is realizing that experience itself is mystical. There is no “knowing” of reality, only re-membering. Where am I wrong if my insight does not fit with the spiritual matrix?

I agree. But the way Leo implied it in a post is that he has transcended books. I understand you will outgrow certain categories like self-help, but don’t be foolish that you think you have transcended reading all together. There is still more to learn from others about different fields because you can’t dedicate your life to researching it all. Books are still essential and you don’t transcend learning. Learning is lifelong. Learning is from outside in and creation is from inside out.

Thanks for your input. I am still not convinced about Infinity of Gods. It sounds like my initial objections to Solipsism, that there are other consciousnesses that are sovereign like mine that I can’t access and yet I dream them up.