Princess Arabia

NOTHING IS WHAT'S REAL. It's Absolute. Infinite.

Nothing's real; like literally. No pun intended.

Do you see how this shit never ends and nobody getting anywhere. Where is there to go when everything is everything. I sit in awe and wonder how life was able to pull this shit off. I'm just in the middle of this drama too. There's no one, but I'm typing away. Then I die and rot in a grave; but then we say death is a concept and there's no one to die. This is some weird shit and people are here just typing away, so it seems, as if something is really happening. What are we awakening to. The alarm clock and back to bed? I wonder what tomorrow brings. Oh no, i forgot, there's no tomorrow only the present moment. Good nite!!

I doubt that's what he was saying. He seems to be more respectful than that. Ewww.

There's no one here. Life is talking to itself. Hi life.

"What is left after no self" is the question. The self didn't just automatically become a no self. There was never any there already. Embody? Integrate? Small self? Lived experience, even ego, all illusory. All the dream. I mean, I agree with you but only as the dream. We can talk dream stuff if you like but why not just wake up to nothing, speaking as nothing to nothing. It is already, but it's fooling itself.

There is already no self and no such thing as next but only for the "me" and the sense of separation. So, there's some traces of that illusory sense there even though not really because it's not really there. It's tricky. No steps to follow and embodying is a thing for the separate self. Your whole sentence suggests there's a sense of self there.

I did.

It is everything. It is the space in which it appears to be a becoming. It's not actually happening as it would take it and an outside something to make something happen. Something (even though it's not a thing) needs a subject and an object to 'happen' it is both the subject and the object so the same thing cannot be happening or becoming the same thing as it is everything. It is only apparent, which means appearing to happen, which means not really happening as in high heels makes a woman appear taller but she hasn't grown an inch, she didn't actually become taller, it never really happened. Nothing is being the woman, the high heels and the appearance of her looking taller, but since it is nothing, nothing is happening but it appears as something happening. 😏😏😏😏

Your problem is using women for sex only. Now you're looking for an alternative. Plenty of men out there are having satisfying relationships with women and enjoying the company of women. They see no need to choose one or the other as in celibacy VS pick up. It's just simply natural for them and they're not necessarily going out to pick up women it just happens. When these men truly enjoy the women they're with and not just looking for a quick horny fix, it tends to be more of a two-way street, things just naturally takes it's course. If break-up happens it happens, if staying together happens, it happens, none if this, I'll go celibate or I'll get this addiction out my system stuff. For you, maybe but that's what happens when it's all about getting laid and using the other sex for self-gratification. Just because it's that way for you, doesn't mean it's that way for others and they won't have some great experiences with it. It's like some can have just a glass or two of wine and enjoy it or guzzle down the whole bottle and be addicted from trying to fill an empty void. Plenty are meeting women naturally without setting out to pick-up women for sex, that's a more natural approach that doesn't lead to what you're addressing. Looking at women as people who you enjoy the company of and trying to find the one that fits into that will not create these kinds of tension you're experiencing and having to be doing something about. It will always be those who have bad intentions with women that encounter these resistances. If I recall you have some strange fantasies about women and that will reflect how women themselves sense the energy around you. Now you're having to reprogram yourself because your relations are proving to be unsatisfying with women.

Appearing as, it's not really being anything but that's the paradox. Nothing is actually happening. That doesn't sit well, now does it.

There is no real internalizing of an idea that reality is nothing. Nothing is what's speaking and being this idea, just as it's speaking and being what you're speaking about. Only a nothing can be all that and why it's free and liberated from bounds, constraints, ideas and concepts because it is all those things. Nothing is everything and everything is nothing. There's nothing here that needs to admit to that because it's not happening, there's noone here that anything is happening to and no one thats limited or unlimited already, there just is no one and limited and unlimited is nothing being that.

Yes, and that something is this fullness, vibrancy that we call life, but it's not actually anything, it is everything, nothing being everything BUT IT'S EMPTY. Nothing is not what the mind interprets as nothing, it's a kind of something but with no qualities, boundless, unlimited and free.

The body is falling asleep and waking up all on it's own. It took hours of habitual sleep and waking at the same time to form that pattern, so it will take hours and repetition to undo that. Nothing you can do or not do but to allow for the changes to happen naturally. If bedtime was 10 p.m. and automatic waking was say 6.a.m and now going to bed is 12midnight and waking is still 6,a.m the body is programmed to wake at 6 a.m. You feel groggy because of less hours of sleep but that has to continue for awhile for the body to get used to. Only solution i see here is to wing it out and try not to be more than 2hrs over, only because the vacay isn't forever and will cut short anyway. Drink lots of water in the morning before anything else to try and balance out the grogginess.

It's not that the ego is false and it's being denied, it just simply does not exist. Nothing exists. Exist means to stand out and nothing stands out. It's all nothing appearing and nothing is everything so there is really no existence but the one the dream has created for itself including trying to hold unto itself as being human. It always loses this battle as we can see what happens "in the end" because it was never there to begin with.

It's not that it's anti-human, where did this term "human" come from. What is it. You have labeled yourself human because everybody else around you has done the same, yet you defend it as if it's truth or a known fact. I'm not speaking of human characteristics or traits or personalities, etc, I'm specifically referring to the word itself. Human. What is that, without just describing how you see humans to be. All you can do is just that. Why not call it "pencil", "potato", no, the difference is in the distinction and category, it's a label and we've given it meaning and slapped on a purpose. Yet you defend it so, seem so attached to that identity, yet you seek openness and speak on becoming unlimited and all that jazz, yet you insist on being something else. This is not a denial of humanity, it's a confirmation of what is. What is, is just that, what is; with no labels, meaning, purpose, distinction or intention. The human/observer/sense of self/individual/person, is the one that has seemingly slapped all those things unto what is and now it tries to undo that by trying to become....become something other than what is. It calls itself something but wants to be something else. This isn't about anti-human spirituality, it's about the flaws of human-spirituality and that's the hindrance; no human and everything is as you speak of in regards to the natural flow and openness to what is already. Take that sense away and all is perfect. Can't you see what you've done. You've put a label on yourself, told yourself what you are, attached yourself to that label, defend that label but in the same breath want to be with the cosmos and break the record by turning a human into an elephant. (analogy here), but it's just what you're trying to accomplish. You keep saying it's hard and might have accomplished some effects through psychedelics but it's an impossible feat. Why, because there's no true becoming....no true transcending,,,no true ...."ingings" of any kind, that's all the dream of separation which is not really happening in the first place. The human/person/individual is the most unnatural thing in this existence, infact, it is it's own existence/reality/dream. Everything else is natural but the human. The one that senses itself to be separate. It's so unnatural it has to practice and process it's way into being. It wants to stay still and silent and seeks for peace and happiness. It just cannot stand itself, how unnatural it is. Yet you insist on being that. I'm not saying the "thing" we see and believe to be human doesn't exist, yes it does, but it's a part of nature itself, the body that is and all it's workings but without the human part, without the one inside, without that sense, it believes to be there but it isn't. That's the illusion/dream that's the unnatural part, without that all is just simply what is and no need for anything to be done. There's no need for that sense to even change, as that's also nature/this/absolute appearing as that but it is a very annoying and disruptive appearance and just what also is this. Also, there's nothing natural about Spirituality, it's either everything or nothing. In the sense of it being man-made, concepts, ideas and stories, there's nothing natural about that.

Nice video.

I just watched a very interesting video on the forum posted by Integration Journey with Rupert Spira speaking on conscious relationships. Really nice video. When it comes to what I'm about to say here, I'd rather speak on it here rather than taint someone's thread with non-dual talk (hate the term non-dual but I use it for clarity and expression), especially if the thread isn't about that. When it comes to relationships with other, sexual/intimate relationships, we seek them out and yearn for them as a sign of unity and wanting to feel the oneness that we are. Afterall, love is the absence of separation so if we feel separate, it's only natural that that energy would want to engage in activities that would make it feel whole again. Doesn't work because it's not really separate but it's a nice try and well worth it if the relationship turns out to be a flourishing one and one of love, understanding and compassion. Nothing can truly take the place of what is already which is no separation. What he's really explaining in that video, is because there's no one really in these bodies, the sense of self (ego) is more likely to taint that relationship and turn it into a needy one, one of 'seeking for' and now nature cannot really do it's thing without the seeming interruption of the natural flow of the essence of oneness. It's not really but only seems to and only in appearance. When that sense is present, it can get very neurotic and seems to be imbalanced and ungrounded and will project that unto everything including the relationship. He's (Rupert) not going to say there's no one really there and that relationship is just happening, who says that (but me, hehe) but that's really the case. The sense of self is the one that seeks for this unity; and if it's into spirituality, then it's more likely to want to seek out a more conscious one, one that's more likely to be compatible with that energy flow so to has a better experience which is all that sense seeks for - a better experience. The reason why our natural essence is peace and tranquility and all that jazz is because there's no one in these bodies already. It's not that the person's natural essence is peace, etc, it's that the sense of a self is not peaceful, at a dis-ease, neurotic, never satisfied and all that jazz. When that's not present, which it's not already but felt as if it is, it's just what's happening but to no one. How can that not be peaceful and bliss. Saying to someone who seeks bliss and harmony that there's no one really there, they'll look at you crazy, but will continue to do practices and processes to attain that state. That's the dream. We hear all the time how our natural state is peace but never really understanding that it's because there's no one there. That's what that really means, the absence of the neurotic and dis-eased self. Even when there's anger and rage and sadness and all those what we call negative things are happening, because there's no one processing that and claiming ownership of nothing and doesn't see other but just what's appearing and doesn't see objects, it doesn't affect the energy as in someone where that sense is present, that's the natural peace that's being spoken about. It's not that those other things won't arise because they will, it's that no one senses them to be personal. This is why the sense of self feels the need to do processes and practice itself away in these contexts because it doesn't feel natural and is trying to feel a sense of naturality. It's a life-long practice because the effects doesn't last forever. Thousands of hours and decade long practices, when stopped will go right back to homeostasis and that's what 'never getting anywhere means'. It's already not happening so how can it change anything for real. This is the freedom I speak about but for no one and it's already done. Not suggesting one stops anything but it's just energy's attempts at unity for something that's already not broken. Nothing wrong either way, again, but only in appearance and to the one observing.

I know I speak of "no one" a lot and how there's no one in these bodies and how life is doing life, etc. It's not that I get a kick out of this or I'm just parroting non-dual speakers or whatever else it might seem like, but it does make for a better understanding of things in general. I mean, the amount of 'clarity' and understandings I've gained from this notion alone is incredible. So many unanswered questions answered to the point where things are starting to fall into place from this realization. I don't try to apply this and I don't use it as an excuse to or not to, (even though no one would be doing that even if it was the case) and I don't need to keep saying no one is doing that or even constantly refer back to that once it's fully 'established' (hard to find the right words to use in these kinds of statements, but i won't get hung up on words here). I don't live my life as a no one nor do I not feel as a someone, that sense is still here; it's that something else is also here that (again, not sure of the word) intuits or maybe 'counter senses' the sense of self. Not sure that's even a thing, but it's irrelevant if it's a thing or not. Ut's kind of a weird sense but it's there and I can't really explain it. It's not an intellectual sense, not even a felt sense, not sure how to categorize it, but anyway that's not the point of this post. I don't really want to go too much in depth about that because it's all stories anyway will be too intellectualized and loses it's freshness and rawness and seem like I'm explaining away something that can't really be explained. I don't mind a little here and there, but even now I can feel a sense of forgetting what this post was really about and I can feel the self sense hitting hard. I lost the flow. That's what I mean. It goes in and out, in and out. Of course, it's not really there but the sense is and that's what's driving the show. The sense is there as much as a sense of smell is but just as one can lose their sense of smell, it's nit that they've lost anything, it's that the sense was never really there to begin with; smelling was happening to no one and now that part of the sense of someone smelling no longer is. That's what happens in dementia, sense of self isn't there. I'll start another post on what I really wanted to write about here before this one gets too long. Don't care the length, but I'm losing momentum.

Back sooner than I thought. Ah James, poor James....we love you James.

I just pretty much learnt/heard of Indras Net. I heard the term twice in a couple days and decided to look it up. I think, maybe once, I've heard the term a few years back because the term doesn't seem 100% new and sounds like some term i've heard before but I never researched or explored it. I was trying to explain something on the forum yesterday about the moon's reflection and they mentioned something about indras net. They probably assumed I 'm familiar with the term but i'm not. Infact, it's between that interaction and Olber's comment about it today on the solipsism thread, that prompted me to check it out. I'm writing about this because my previous post, the one exactly prior to this which I made yesterday about my sister and Paris and me being in my bubble and everyone in their bubble and so on sounds a bit similar to the indras net concept. The difference I believe is that I think each person isn't connected to the other and is their own individual net but only as a reflection. Anyway, this post isn't to try and figure anything out but to say how I'll be coming up with things all on my own all the time just to see it explained somewhere else or is a thing in some well-known philosophy - true or not, is the case or not. I see it happen all the time. Now I'm starting to wonder if I'm spiritually gifted or that I'm truly alone doing this all by myself. I know the terms "all alone" and "by myself" sounds solipstic(sic) sic means not sure of the spelling, but I don't really mean it like that; infact, i'm not sure what I really mean. I was like a virgin to spirituality when I found Leo's channel. I never knew about any of this stuff prior which has been about 5-6/7 years now. I know it was before covid but not too long before maybe 1-2yrs before. I was listening to and watching law of attraction videos and stuff like that for like a year before that but that was it. Then yt recommended Leo's channel and I never looked back. Sure I've watched tons of other videos since, had my share of questions and confusions and all that, but ilve never subscribed to any particular ideologies or philosophies knowingly; meaning knowing this wzs so and so like say Buddhism and then I ascribed to it. No, I'd find out later that what I've said was a Buddhist tradition or belief or advaita or something like that. If it weren't for people telling me how what I'm saying is advaita or other mentioning the name, I would have never known about that tradition or whater it is philosophy. I would probably watch a video and see advaita in the description but it's not because I searched out advaita and deliberately watched because of that, I may just be resonating with something said and liked to watch the video for it's own sake. I get accused of advaita stuff all the time but I'll just be saying stuff on behalf of my own accord and what I 'believe' to be the case; I put belief in quotes but it's beyond belief but for the sake of writing I'll just say believe. Sure, I was introduced to non-duality and I got a bit fixated on that because it answered just about every unanswered question I had in the past but I'm not even all over the place as much with that and stick to just two or three speakers. I never watch Tony Parsons but have been accused of mimmicking him in the past. Advaita is not the same as non-duality and they are teachers, I'm not into teachers of non-duality only speakers. People who aren't giving you a call to action. Do this or that. It wasn't until I was being accused of advaita stuff that I really even realize there was a thing called advaita (about 2yrs ago), so I'm not it's brand new to me now but I don't know much about any of these common philosophies and what they teach prese and what belongs to which and why. All I know is that from all the things i've heard, seen, experienced, intuited, thought about feel, idk, whatever, and from listening to what sone speakers have to say (yes, there are influences, but they tie in with my own) I just speak from my own gut influence and that's how I'm able to speak with my own words, give my own analogies and can speak so indepth on the topics I speak on. Not saying I know them to be true or that everything I say is the case, no, what the heck do I know, but I'm saying most of it isn't just from someone else's saying, it is coming from what I say and sometimes feel to be the case, then I'll get accused of following some philosophy. I'm rambling on, I'll break this thought up.

You're probably the only person here speaking from direct experience on the topic and we don't stand a fair chance competing with this explanation. So real. Such an explanation. I felt solipsic reading it.

You see, all these arguments and going around and around on solipsism, hallucinations, imaginary and all this stuff would be solved by the realization that there's no one in these bodies. Would tie in nicely and we'll all go sipping margaritas on the beach while singing kumbaya. Imaginary because there's no one, hallucinating because there's no one and solipsism because there's not two. No one in these bodies so you're imagining other to be real because you think you're a real person. Hallucinating because you're not a person but the dream itself. I mean all Leo is trying to say fits in perfectly that there's no one in these bodies but when I say it, it's like why bother there's no benefit. Hehe. I love it. This energy rocks. Lots of drama and it never gets stale. After all, nothing else to do right but keep chasing the donkey's tail. I like donkey, dogs are smarter than donkeys.

What's interesting to me is how people are so quick to call God/energy a "he", even though I'm aware for some it's just a figure of speech but some actually think God is a male/man, and refuse to see themselves as an it or energy or that there's no actual person inside. Some will go as far as to say they were made in the image of God and say they're a person/human while God is a whatever they see God as except as a person. I'm a human/person and I'm made in the image of God. What image is that, I wonder. They'll use the word "he" in sentences when talking about God (i do too, that's not the point), but when it comes to themselves they can't see themselves beyond human or a person. God is not a person and neither are you. There are no real persons. There are personalities and that's being referred to as a persona or a person. I'm not denying anything, how can I be denying personhood when all I know about being a person is that I was born into this and was told by someone that I'm a person. These are just labels anyway and really doesn't matter and yes I do live my life as a person/human with likes, dislikes, traits, characteristics etc. I don't need to write about being human, but I can surely write about not really being human, makes for a more interesting topic. Ask most what does it mean to be human they won't even be able to tell you or just name off a bunch of humanistic traits. No clue, but they'll fight you over that label and insist that's what they are and say they live in a relative world when relativity is an illusion. So therefore what they're saying is they live in an illusion but they are real. Relativity is the Absolute being relative and doesn't have a reality on its own, so yes it is illusory. This is not a denial of relativity, it is acknowledging it's illusory nature . People insist on dragging you down with them in the pot of boiling water because they are delusional and cannot see pass their delusional nature. I'm delusional too but I won't insist on being something that someone told me that I was. Where else did you learn about humans being humans from, other humans. They'll ask for proof of everything under the sun but believe humans must telling them they're humans. They'll say how DNA, genetics, having a body and so and so proves this or that but when you ask them who is having a body, they can't answer you. They'll parrot some spiritual saying about I'm not the body but then can't say what they are other than being human. I'm not saying I know this or that about being a person or not a person or human or not human but I'll never run anyone down about it either way because I don't fucking know what I am and I can't know what I am because knowing is separation and there's none.

Schizophrenic Gura. Hehe.