Breakingthewall

Absolutely exactly There are the same. Human mind has the ability to understand the logic of the relationship. This also includes completely counterintuitive logics such as the principle of decoherence or mathematics of chaos . Absolutely everything that exists is organized coherently; the fact of existing implies coherence, and any coherence can be mathematically defined. God doesn't want, because if it wants it would be a relative entity that wants limited things. God is not imagining the reality, it would be a dualistic scheme. God is the reality, and the reality develops itself in coherent relationships.

Knowing or understanding can be conceptual, direct, or open. Conceptual understanding is when there's a mental process that compares things with learned symbols and archetypes. There's what you want to understand, the symbolic software as a filter, and you. Direct understanding is without symbolism; for example, you go outside and see a hungry tiger walking toward you. You understand the matter directly and immediately. And finally, open understanding is when you perceive the flow of reality and become one with it. There's no subject understanding an object; rather, reality unfolds and understands itself.

@TruthFreedom Let's see, as @Carl-Richard says, all these ideas of solipsism, that there's nothing outside your experience, that you're God creating reality, are logical constructs. So, if you make logical constructs, why do you make the ones that seem, let's say, less logical? To feel special, different, cool? Yes, okay, you can tell me you awakened to that fact by taking drugs, but that's nothing to me because once, while taking drugs, I awakened to the fact that all the women in a club wanted sex with me. It was a total awakening, undeniable. But then, well, it needed some qualification. So maybe to make logical deductions it's better to use logic than drugs.

You can see absolutely totally fully how reality is structuring itself constantly, how its flow is organized. It's a liviing movement that can be detected everywhere. The point is that it's not something linear, defined, archetypal, black and white. It's the character of reality, its nature. If you want to see, you have to eliminate the barriers. Then you intuit the true nature of the reality in everything. Understanding It's about openess not about knowledge.

Yes of course, what I meant is that superficial or deep depend on your perspective, not the object itself; I suppose they're two ways of expressing the same thing. Let's say there are two ways to operate psychologically: from the outside or from the inside. From the outside, it means adopting social paradigms and equating happiness with fulfilling those paradigms. success, beauty, fame, honor, whatever. This becomes limiting; your vision is separate from you, filtering everything according those paradigms. You're a social robot incapable of opening yourself to depth in the slightest. You live in a crust of ice, and you can only see your reflection; everything is filtered through your self-image. If you manage to free yourself from this psychological structure that operates through symbols and archetypes, your vision instantly becomes profound. When your psyche is fragmented into archetypes, it is fragmented into barriers. Energy is contained, it bounces around, creates self-referential vortices, and gets trapped. When these energetic barriers disappear, reality automatically becomes fluid, without borders, without definition; then everything is seen as energetic currents, flows of reality that are not classifiable. That's the difference between superficial or profound, means with barriers or without. You could be a genius that operates with barriers, like saint Augustine of ipona for example, or a retarded who perceive the depth in its absolute absence of limitations

The limited is an expression the unlimited. If you perceive the form in its depth, you realize that it is total; it just doesn't seem so from the surface.

What a child needs is challenge, exposure, and reality. Because behind every child lies the wild, and the wild is the expression of openness. Exposure and challenge connect you with the true nature of being. Protection and the fulfillment of all needs separate you. Then you would become a emo absolutely lost in the social jungle. Well, same than everyone else.

It's inevitable. The fact of existing implies change , change implies relationship and the condition for any relationship is logic. What is not logic is simply inexistent, can't exist because it's not synchronized. If anything exist there is a perfect logic behind it. Perhaps we don't understand that logic, but it exists.

Yes me too, I spent a while thinking about those words to see if I could find the meaning, but all that came to mind was a loop. It's like that thing about: what is the sound of one hand clapping? And then the student suddenly achieves enlightenment. to me that sounds like: you don't understand this, right? But I do. Am I mysterious? Okay, you are, can you explain it to me? The explanation appears when the mind falls. Wtf

All knowledge and experience is form, relationship, becoming. This doesn't imply that it's false or contemptible, but rather that it's a manifestation of reality. According to you, there is an essential reality, and that's what you truly are, right? Absolute being, or whatever you want to call it. But thoughts are an expression of that reality, therefore they are real.

You're addressing a much more complex topic than it seems. Let's see, 1- humans don't create logic, they discover it. Logic is previous than the thought 2- logic means coherence, and coherence doesn't mean order, mean relationships that doesn't cancel each other out; they mesh together 3- logic is not content, is form. Logic doesn't say what's real, say how has to behave any relationship to doesn't contradict itself. Then logic is the first limitation possible in the unlimited. Or in another words, logic is the necessary condition to existence. What is not logic doesn't exist. It's absolutely impossible. Logic is relation, relation is change, change is existence.

for me that have no meaning. Saying that is something within the story that claims it doesn't exist, so it's like a mental loop. The story says that history doesn't exist. What does that mean? A kind of koan. Koans imply that the mind is an obstacle, but I don't think so. The obstacle is the errors of the mind, not the mind itself.

Maybe before physical birth, but you can't remember it because it's the rule in this exotic dimensión. You will remember in the very moment when you die. I mean, who knows about anything? It's absolutely totally impossible doing those assessments

Who knows? Perhaps you're operating in thousands of dimensions simultaneously to achieve the exact energy frequency needed for the demigod level, which you've been trying to attain for eons without success. Your multidimensional family is very disappointed in you and will probably decide to eliminate you if you don't succeed this time. Shameful.

Exactly Usually are misleading , they imply that reality is not real and that there is another, higher reality that is. It would be more accurate to say forms and formlessness, for example. Form is not false, it's limited. Limited doesn't mean false, means limited. It's not less real than unlimited, it's just limited. Real and unreal are adjectives that categorizes reality, so they are absolutely wrong. Spirituality is absolutely wrong formulated, that's why nobody understands it, because it's impossible to understand. What changes is the form, the formless can't change. The form and the formless are not two different categories are two aspects of reality. The formless is essence, form is appearance. Reality always has an appearance or form, since "always" implies time, and time is equivalent to form. Time means delay between changes. Without delay there is no change; a limit on the speed of change is necessary for it to be change. Then "always" change and form are because the the interval between changes is outside of time; it does not exist. Existing is a verb, means happening. Existence is the expression of reality, that is absence of limitations, openess, absolute being It's the same as the self and dual consciousness. There is always a self and dual consciousness from the perspective of the self and dual consciousness, since the interval without consciousness is not conscious of itself. The point is to understand that the self is not someone, not a soul or a subject, and conciseness is not something, just a form that the reality takes; it is a consequence of a center that appears when reality reflects upon itself, creating a self-preserved universe that operates within the framework of the primary universe, what we call life. Reality don't need consciusness, it's not consciusness. Consciousness is a form of the reality that happens when center that register the reality appears. In the unlimited possibilities are infinite centers that register the reality, all are the same, the reality in a form.

In other words, experience is reality structured in a certain way. Duality, a self-preserving system that creates a center which registers reality, creating an experience, a becoming to which continuity and meaning are given. But that is not reality; it is a form of reality. Reality without that center or self is exactly the same as with it, only without registering differences. Opening yourself to what reality is without a center or self is enlightenment. Reality is something, because it is, it is totality. It is not definable; you can be it but not thinking it. You already are it, just remove the veil and that's it.

The point is to see that the self is a center that registers reality, and thus experience arises. Therefore, one self is the same as another self, just a center. As you said, without a self there is no experience, because experience is reality in a certain dualistic way. The point is to see that reality is not experience, but rather that experience is made of reality, experience is reality in an specific structure. So what's reality without experience? Reality without center, or without self. What's that? Enlightenment.

Well I should said that this is just my perspective. Regarding your question, (again just my perspective) there cannot be an eternal alternation of blue and green because if there were, that would be your reality now and it isn't. Therefore, if it were to happen, it would have to have a beginning, and everything that has a beginning has an absolute limit, then it's limited, and therefore also has to have an end, without any other possibility. More than that, if now your reality were that alrernance, it implies a limit between blue and green, so it's a limited reality and this implies an inevitable end or a change of frequency. Only the limitless can be absolutely limitless

Reality is neither an illusion nor a dream. That would imply a subject with certain characteristics performing an action, dreaming, which is interrupted, and that subject realizes that this reality was false and that their reality upon waking, which is different, is real. This is impossible. If "God" were to realize that everything was a dream, "realizing" would be another dream. The absolute total is not an entity, not someone who chooses, decides, or acts; it is reality itself, absolute being. Absolute means without limitation, and without limitation means without attributes or actions. Reality simply is. What appears are manifested possibilities.

Any state, sensation, existence, or universe must be limited, since in the absence of limits there is the absolute, which is not something, but total openness, the unfathomable void, the nothingness that is everything, however you want to call it. Therefore, any limited reality carries its own limit; it cannot be eternal because that would be unlimited, and it is limited by definition.

I said it because you and the user ishanga were talking about Shiva We should define what we mean by "God." I would say that for most people, God is an entity that creates reality. If we qualify this and say that reality is God, then obviously everyone believes in God since they believe in reality. What is not possible is a separate, creator entity (in my opinion)

I told you at the beginning what Shiva means the unlimited in this conversation , not in general. Sure it has different meanings. Those names are just a way to express an idea, not something rigid . But benign is not a bad adjective because the unlimited is not evil or selfish, is just unlimited and it's perceived as freedom, perfection, glory. It's not like: if it's unlimited it includes the evilness. No, it's just absolute being. Possible evilness arises in the form, it's an appearance.

Because talking about this topic makes me strive for maximum clarity, and I like the feeling, like a sport.

Just communication

Me, because I prefer be open than closed, contracted, because that feels as deep suffering