An young being

By realising that emotions like anger, are no different than thoughts.

Why can't awakening be an experience that switches off your senses and brain so that you can see what you are fundamentally made of? Making you less aware of your surroundings ( which is taken by your sense organs) but more aware of the primary source of energy which is consciousness? Can you deny this statement through experience?

Curiosity helps us to survive. That's life's purpose. Even liberation is assisting survival indirectly. Otherwise why would you need to come back from the liberated state of mind? To use the knowledge to get emotional relief, isn't it?

What I understand is that we strongly believe that consciousness is everything because we are able to experience only that. Even if there is a concept called multiple infinities and multiple consciousness, we won't be able to experience it because there can be a limitation of what we are able to comprehend with our human mind. We simply can't understand something beyond infinity. We would simply say infinity means everything and it stops there.

Then why do we have something called a curious mind?

Is this called philosophy? I still believe everything exists since I was born. He atleast had one change in belief.

What kind of experience (if it can be described in words) lead to the understanding that brain is imaginary?

This might give a different perspective : Imagine or realize all human beings are fundamentally the same (made up of the same material called consciousness). Then what differentiates a human being from another human being ? Memory (or karma we call it) gives a human being an unique character, it may be genetic or memories you acquire during your experience of life. Now imagine I delete all your memory and somehow modify your genetic material also (both are not possible now but definitely within our ability) . I copy all your friend's memory ( body and mind) and put it inside yours. Imagine you are still alive after doing all this. Now, are you experiencing your pov or your friend's pov?

So, am I alone or not? Or both?

I may not be able to understand you better than a therapist, but I have some physical problems with my body which are unsolvable, atleast for now. That hurt me a lot in my childhood, but when I understood it's just a very very tiny problem compared to the whole spectrum of life, I came out of it after a while and now I don't give a shit about it. You may not be able to repair it until you accept it as part of your life.

From Wikipedia summary, for your quick reference guys: ( Thank you wiki ?) Solipsism (/ˈsɒlɪpsɪzəm/ (listen); from Latin solus, meaning 'alone', and ipse, meaning 'self')[1] is the philosophical idea that only one's mind is sure to exist. As an epistemological position, solipsism holds that knowledge of anything outside one's own mind is unsure; the external world and other minds cannot be known and might not exist outside the mind. Denial of material existence, in itself, does not constitute solipsism. A feature of the metaphysical solipsistic worldview is the denial of the existence of other minds. Since personal experiences are private and ineffable, another being's experience can be known only by analogy. Philosophers try to build knowledge on more than an inference or analogy. The failure of Descartes' epistemological enterprise brought to popularity the idea that all certain knowledge may go no further than "I think; therefore I exist"[4] without providing any real details about the nature of the "I" that has been proven to exist. The theory of solipsism also merits close examination because it relates to three widely held philosophical presuppositions, each itself fundamental and wide-ranging in importance:[4] My most certain knowledge is the content of my own mind—my thoughts, experiences, affects, etc. There is no conceptual or logically necessary link between mental and physical—between, say, the occurrence of certain conscious experience or mental states and the 'possession' and behavioral dispositions of a 'body' of a particular kind. The experience of a given person is necessarily private to that person. To expand on the second point, the conceptual problem here is that the previous assumes mind or consciousness (which are attributes) can exist independent of some entity having this capability, i.e., that an attribute of an existent can exist apart from the existent itself. If one admits to the existence of an independent entity (e.g., the brain) having that attribute, the door is open. (See Brain in a vat) Some people hold that, while it cannot be proven that anything independent of one's mind exists, the point that solipsism makes is irrelevant. This is because, whether the world as we perceive it exists independently or not, we cannot escape this perception (except via death), hence it is best to act assuming that the world is independent of our minds.[5] There is also the issue of plausibility to consider. If one is the only mind in existence, then one is maintaining that one's mind alone created all of which one is apparently aware. This includes the symphonies of Beethoven, the works of Shakespeare, all of mathematics and science (which one can access via one's phantom libraries), etc. Critics of solipsism find this somewhat implausible.[citation needed] However, being aware simply acknowledges its existence; it does not identify the actual creations until they are observed by the user

Dreams, maybe, but only now. Where we are now, that is real.

Psychologists are always the best companion to solve problems for the 'real' life, not enlightenment, especially without guidance.

Did you kill him or @SoonHei did? Or are you both the same??

Nope ! Not even a single being I am close with who is happy almost all the time ! Spiritual gurus like Sadhguru seem to be happy all the time, but who knows, they might only 'seem' to be and not 'all the time'.

If that's the definition, then I had met hundreds of awakened people, at least for a short period of time.

NO. Wait, what about the man who was begging in the streets but always had a smiling face??? YES! Wait, how do I know if he is 'awakened' ? Just because he was happy? How can I say so sure if I myself haven't experienced what awakening is ? I would better say, I might have, just for the sake of answering the question.

This question just came in my mind and I am curious. From what I understand, we are able to get a glimpse of reality by making our tiny consciousness in this body merge with the whole consciousness, although for a short period of time. But we get to come back to the body and have that experience recorded in our memory. When we make our tiny consciousness merge completely with the whole consciousness, we experience what we call as mahasamadhi and we never return to the body, as per my understanding. ( That's the only way since one cannot come back from dead to tell what is experienced.) Likewise, is it possible that a part of consciousness ( imagine few drops of water separating from a pool of water and joining the ocean ) separate from our individual consciousness and merge with the whole consciousness ? If it's possible, we are likely to lose a part of soul and we may become a little less human and more animal, maybe ? This is a wild thing, I know, but has anybody heard of such people who were in the extreme of the extremes and only partly able to come back?

Anything, which is done in extremes always lead to a negative experience. Take exercise, for example. You will be doing it once in a while. But suddenly you get this energy to build huge muscles and do exercise without breaks. That will break your muscles and it will leave a negative impact permanently. Your mind might never want to do exercise again. Similarly, based on my little experience, its always better to do it progressively. Starting from 20 minutes per day, even if you increase one minute per day, within one and a half month you will be doing around 1 hour every day. Now if you feel uncomfortable, you can increase or decrease a bit. Like @LarryW has written, it's better to try for one or two days first. Otherwise you may get bored and lose interest permanently in doing meditation.

I love those guided meditations, especially for having a sound sleep (like yoga nidra) . That works like magic!

By my understanding, progress in meditation works differently for different people. Most people advice focusing on the breath in the noise, in the belly etc. Some people advice visualising an object in mind. And some people advice not to focus intenselyat anything at all, just observing thoughts coming to the mind. I have a calm mind, not filled with much thoughts. Which technique might work best for faster progression for people with calmer minds?

Nice! The words are filled with deep insights, I am always intrigued by the hidden meanings in various religious texts and even sculptures. Even though I follow Hinduism, I know nothing about it, nowadays it's sad to see people here are more interested in bribing and decorating God with blind faith rather than experiencing God.

Yeah, it makes sense, thank you!

Yeah thanks, gives more clarity.

Sorry, my tiny mind is not able to get it. I assume you meant 'emptiness' instead of 'emotionless'. If so, Is 'nothing' technically made up of something? Ok, I seem to get this point. What I understand from your words is that all realities we perceive exist in a single moment of consciousness, and hence time has no meaning. Still, I believe that some meaning can be found and it will all make sense one day. Maybe not in this part of time, but atleast in some other part of time.