Breakingthewall

What could be God? If God is something with a will that create things, that god would be just a god. Ultimately, what could be the absolute cause of existing? Only the absence of limitations, the fact of that there are not an absolute restriction to the fact of being, it would be impossible. Then reality is, and being appears as relative manifestations without limits The human mind has been created by evolution, by the interaction and war that life is. Being means that what's possible appears. Human mind is possible, then it is.

You don't need to be taught, just breaking your inner limits. It's the same for anyone in any time. A tiger is different, it's a natural hunter taught by millions of years of evolution.

That's the main principle of Buddhism. Imo it's an impossible ideal. Those arhats use to be in Tibet in wonderful natural places right? What if they were working 16 h per day in a factory in Bangladesh? If anyone tells them, what would you prefer, return to the Himalayas or here? Maybe they would answer :for me it's the same, I don't care, everything is the reality. Give me 2 hours more per day if you want

Id say that enlightenment is a state of the human mind in which the barriers have dissolved and there is no absolute difference between reality and mind, object and subject; then the mind perceives itself as total, unlimited. Not to be confused with solipsism, it doesn't mean that you are creating the others, just that the absolute limits have fallen, the relative limits always exist. You could think, well, I already know that the reality and me are one, can't be otherwise. Yes ok, but the difference is about perceiving it by default without any closure.

Yeah, the problem is that who is observing with attention to understand is the same object that should be understood. For example, if you stare directly to the fear of death, this fear is not something out of yourself, is one of the main structures that constitutes what you are . If you try to understand this fear by the structured mind you could get a conceptual understanding, but the point is stare directly without the filter of the mind. It's not easy because it's hidden, that's why imo it's easier to start with more accessible fears, like trauma. Trauma is the key to be able to understand yourself, because it's obvious.

Since the dawn of humanity, there have been shamans, people who claim to be in contact with the source of creation. The term "enlightened" varies greatly depending on the tradition, but it always has commonalities: equanimity, detachment from worldly matters and power struggles, and often celibacy.... In other words, someone who is more there than here. Before Buddha, there were the Advaita Vedantas who went alone into the forest in acts of extreme ascetic renunciation. Such people also existed in ancient Greece, and I suppose in all cultures. But the definition of "enlightened" is still undefined, and I suppose it never will be

What you said about exposure is true but imo what is the most important is the understanding of yourself as a psyche, all the layers of need of belonging, fear in many levels, need of control, etc, and look directly all of those energetic structures that shape you as a human mind. In my case I did because I had a lot of bad mental and emotional vibration, then I realized that living in that way was a trap, a solution must be found, then I started looking inside obsessively. Anyway, spirituality is in many cases a kind of patch, a solution for everything that works denying everything.

Good reflection. I agree; few people will seek transcendence of the ego unless forced to, but in theory, it's not always like that. For example, Buddha was a man who had everything: his life was joyful and vibrant, surrounded by people who loved him, happily married with a son. But intellectually, he realized the trap of the ego, and he couldn't bear to live in it any longer, so he abandoned everything to seek liberation. In real life, I'd say absolutely no one would do that, and Buddha is certainly a legend, but even so, he is Buddha.

The fundamental idea of Buddhism is to completely transcend the human matrix, totally and absolutely, to release all desire and attachment, and in this way open yourself to the absolute, being it. This cannot be explained because any explanation would be relative. It is a fact, an action, a reality that occurs and which they call nirvana. Their intuition is accurate and their nirvana real, but in my opinion, you can open yourself to it without becoming a Buddha indifferent to life and death.

Yeah, seeing that is essential, imo. Humans are social beings, and this generates constant tension on various levels. Buddhists try to turn off that aspect, to extinguish your candle, as they say, and become an absolutely alone being, outside the social matrix, a person without attachment or desire who can spend two years in a cave in absolute peace. For me, that's like giving up in some sense. The idea is to be able to be open to the total but at the same time be part of the matrix, to have attachments to your friends, to try to contribute something positive to humanity every day. To be within the friction and suffering inherent in being human but with a door open to the absolute. Absolute openess is empty of structure, but it is. Imo that's enlightenment, being open to the absolute being, but others would think that you need to be like Buddha without attachment and desire, one with the openess.

Imo that would be just a possibility, not a necessary telos. Without limits it would happen infinitely, but just because nothing prevents it.

Maybe you feel in some way but you don't understand exactly why. Maybe things are much deeper than they seems

It's full of being, that's the point. The only way to realize the nature of reality, yourself, is that. If you manage to dissolve all the barriers many times, in some point for you it's very easy feel the unlimited in any moment, it's like right now you are that all time not just in meditation. It's not that the individual disappear and not you are nothing and you don't think, it's that the individual and thoughts appears as secondary and openess as essential, all time. It's not an idea but a change of frequency. Saying that forms are illusion, or maya, it's an idea that arises in the form. Forms are forms and that's it, you don't need to define everything, just to be open to the total, and try to be one with it, aligned with it. Even you are open to the no frontier you could get obsessive about money, jealous, sex, revenge, hate, and those funny programming inherent to be human. The point is being able to get out from the dense level easily, or at least possible. Emotions of the body are essential. The trauma is printed in the body. When you release trauma you could feel seriously sick. It's like that in every breath you take the trauma is codifying every micro movement. It's common to feel separation from your body, don't being connected with it to hide dark areas and can function. The process of openess implies being totally open to your sensations, because there use to be lot of unconscious tension in the body that keeps you isolated. The point is being in the reality totally present, open, without psychological protection. All the mental bubble that keeps us isolated is psychological defense, layers that we created due pain and fear to can function in the world

Thought is essential because the human psyche has an enormous symbolic and conceptual dimension. Understanding the mechanisms that govern this psyche is essential, and for that, thought is necessary. Not only thought, but the direct perception of the emotional layers that govern it is even more essential, but without a correct framework for thought, you are lost.

I think that from a logical standpoint, the explanation is very simple. The absence of limits is. Being and the absence of limits are synonymous. Absence of being would be an absolute limitation. The fact of being always manifests; non-manifestation does not occur, therefore it is not. Any manifestation happens a relative change of state. What changes state is not something, like a spirit or consciousness, There is no thing underlying change; change is the form that manifestation takes. Any change is a possibility coherent with itself, a logical equation. If the absolute fact of being emits limitless potential, the possible equations unfold, interconnect, and give rise to more limitless possibilities. It is something absolutely inevitable that needs no design; it is design itself, and it also needs no will since it is unstoppable. There is no ultimate telos. There is only the inevitability of being/limitlessness. Telos appears locally wherever manifestation produces intentional structures, that could happen infinitely but reality can't be limited to them , then even if an infinite God exist, would be just a manifestation of the openess, because infinite doesn't mean absolute. The only absolute is being, or limitlessness.

To do this, you don't have to seek openness, but rather your internal limits. But It's important to understand that the ultimate goal is absolute openness, not emptiness, God, or anything else; this makes the work much more effective. Limits always carry an emotional charge, a need to maintain stability. Letting go of all limits is terrifying; in my experience, the way to do it is to become aware of them. The ultimate limit, for me, is the subject-object duality. At a certain point, your mind is completely empty but limited to the awareness of "I am." In one part, there is a center that perceives, and in another, the perception itself, which is the fact of being. If you focus on this long enough, without any other content, at a certain point it collapses, and what remains is total openness. This doesn't mean that the mind needs to be absolutely silent, but rather that the inner dialogue becomes irrelevant. You might think, "Oh wow, 'I am,'" but that thought lacks a fundamental ontological level; it doesn't define reality; it lacks emotional charge, it's just something that appears. Even in total openness there are thoughts, but they are in the background, like autopilot; there is no need to silence them, just jump to the level where their meaning is irrelevant

I mean absence of absolute limits. Ultimately reality is that, any god, telos, anything is something that happens because there are not limits that restrict it, but if that god lose its limits, then if become the unlimited itself, and the unlimited is formless, without intention, immutable, then that god wouldn't be God anymore, just a god that is open to its true nature. Any change implies limits. Limits exist, relatively, but absolutely are impossible. Then from an absolute perspective god is just openess Its possible for any mind get open to the unlimited, that's the point of spiritual work, because ultimately it's our nature and the nature of everything. But with a frame like langans one it would be impossible because there is always a grip in the idea of telos . To open yourself to the unlimited you have to release all grips

He says that reality is infinite, unlimited, intelligent, and has a telos, a direction. This would be an infinite reality, but limited to being intelligent and directional. Unlimited implies a total absence of structure. Infinity does not imply that; even numbers are infinite, but limited, they do not include odd numbers. His entire vision is limited, enclosed; this prevents the mind from truly opening to the totality. His philosophy has a fundamental flaw, and with that flaw is a closure, not an instrument of openess

Anyway, about Langan. His entire theory rests on a logical leap. He correctly states that reality has no exterior, an obvious logical deduction, and observes that reality contains coherence and complex systems. He then deduces that reality in its entirety must be a self-aware system, because otherwise, how would one explain the perfection of these systems? Furthermore, he deduces that reality/God has a direction, a goal. Let's see, if reality is infinite, as he says, it has no direction at a total level; this is impossible. It's not going anywhere because it hasn't even started. Or in other words, if God is absolute, how could it have a goal if there is not any state that it needs to achieve? And reality can be a perfect system of unimaginable complexity without a creator, simply through self-selection of the most efficient possibilities. In short, he needs a God with a goal to explain reality. Okay, so now, explain God. The point is, the reality can be conscious in local points, but conscious as a whole if it's unlimited is logically impossible, and he speaks from logic.

You were the one who made a dismissive "meh" comment without explaining anything. If the OP thinks the video is high-level and you don't, you should have to explain your reasons, not with a narcissistic "meh," which translates to: you're not up to my standards, worm. Then the OP replies, and your response is an outburst of anger. Sounds bad, man, sounds like troubles.

That absolute truth is that you are. Anyone can understand it, it's very simple. What is not so simple is being open to that truth, to the absolute being, because our psyche is designed for closedness

Absolutely, who's going to believe a supposedly enlightened being who tells you that searching enlightenment is a mistake after abandoning his family and go to the Himalayas seeking enlightenment and being a whole year meditating in the I am, then realizing that outside alone it's cold then returning with the family, having his son working in his shop of cigarettes while he's in the top floor smoking cigarettes after cigarette compulsively telling the people contradictive explanations about enlightenment? I guess that no one

In other words, for reality to exist, a causal chain must occur, a series of consecutive events relative to one another, and this is what we call time. When a causal chain branches into two, what we call space emerges. What we perceive as space is the separation between these distinct causal chains. Or to put it another way, space is not something concrete, it is not a fixed frame, but is defined by the time it takes for a causal chain to travel from one causal node to another. And this time is defined by the relative procceses between the two causal chains.

In reality, relative spacetime necessarily appears, since without spacetime there is no becoming. Therefore, the lapse of time without spacetime does not happen because happening is a process that's involves space time. This implies that at a given moment, reality self-organizes into stable patterns relative to each other, forming more complex patterns that exist as cyclical processes. That is to say, they begin and end. But the very fact of existing cannot end, because nothing can prevent other processes from appearing. So, to your question of where I am and where the tree is, the answer would be that you are two interconnected but separate processes because without separation there would be no process and therefore no manifested reality, and this separation occurs due to the spacetime gap. The point is that the perception is the tree and you are a creation of your mind, but that creation happens with the interconnection of the tree, the light, and 4 billion of year of evolution that creates that mind that is itself a process inside of a bigger process that is interconnected with everything.

It can because you don't need to know every detail to know yourself, you just need to know your nature, what you are, and how that nature manifest. Then you don't need to know every single possible manifestation. They are just manifestations, what is the point is being open to the essence, and you can't do it now being a human, you don't need to be that god