Breakingthewall

That's the typical Buddhist paradigm. They consider attachment and desire an illusion, therefore they work hundreds or thousands of hours erasing attachment and desire. In this way, they achieve a tranquil state. And they call that enlightenment. Well, it isn't. Enlightenment is opening to the living source, not the quiet peace of a 78-year-old retiree. Quiet peace is better than having OCD, but it's not related to enlightenment. Consider desire and attachment an illusion is just a human idea, like consider sex impure or poverty a shit. Enlightenment is not about those preferences. You could say that a quiet mind can be a previous condition for enlightenment, but not that a quiet mind is enlightenment . Also it's possible a mind with desire and attachment that is open in some moments and circumstances to the absolute. And very possible a quiet mind that never can be open to the source

If God is infinite it has no preference because it's precisely everything right? Then it's not creating anything with an intention because any intention would imply preference. Then this god wouldn't be an entity with a will, but the unlimited that is and being it's manifested in unlimited possibilities happening. Then , the unlimited that is is not "one", it's unlimited. That's why they call non duality instead oneness, because it's not two, but neither one, it's unlimited

What you are saying is absolutely wrong, it's a delusional view that is very common, I also had it many times with psychedelics. It's a stage in the dissolution of the density of the self. It has a name in meditation, Im going to search any link. This one for example. Look, what you are talking about is a creation of the mind. Don't get stuck in it

This is as far of real enlightenment as can be. It's just a belief that you get by watching gurus and that now you really believe that it's the truth. It's very obvious reading you that your ego is very dense. It's not that you still have work to do, it's that you haven't started yet

Yes I'm talking about myself, but what I am is not a mind, it's the absolute unlimited expressed now as a human I didn't create nothing, existence arises in the unlimited because it's unlimited, and what I am now is a local process that expresses the unlimited now, but I'm not the only local process because what I am, the unlimited, is expressed in unlimited forms. They also use to ask money, and some times that you suck his dick. It's up to you to accept it or not

Seems absolutely sure that there are always form, because the lapse between 2 forms in not a lapse, doesn't exist. existing means form, and form means process, relative change. What you could ask is: is the unlimited the same unlimited without existing? Is the nothing same absolute than the something? I'd say yes. The unlimited is absolute depth, and manifestation is just inevitable consequence of the fact of limitlessness

It's you, the human, who is an expression of the unlimited, who recognizes itself as the unlimited expressed in a local process. But this doesn't mean that in one side is the unlimited and in other the human seeing it, both are one.

Human mind can become unlimited and then be one with the unlimited. Then the unlimited recognizes itself, it's precisely you, but without limits

Reality is not a mind, if it were a mind then if would be alone, because a mind implies a center that elaborates. Reality is unlimited. Reality and unlimited are synonyms.

That seem a total dissolution. Could you explain how was more deeply? For me not so. The barriers are very subtle. Maybe a barrier could be implying some things about the reality due other trips or realizations that are accepted by the unconscious as ontological Truth. For me totally dissolving the mind make me see how the mental structures close and how difficult is being totally free of them . Im achieving little by little that my mind be a hole, without psyche. Just openess. It's not repressing the psyche but dissolving it. Sometimes the psyche arises of course, but not like something that drag me totally in the need of belonging, bonds, success, "glory", and over all trauma, as was the usual. Now my mind is empty, I can do any psychedelic and trauma doesn't arises even a bit. 2 years ago mind was still full of hate. Real hate for some parts of my family, in a level that I was worried about getting sick. I honestly thought that would be impossible to be free of that, and I am totally free of that, it's absolutely deactivated. Maybe it's possible to be totally free and open now, totally aligned and transparent. I don't know what is possible. I agree that it's essential to be as free as it's possible when death arrives. Not only for the suffering but let's say, for respect to myself and life as an expression of the reality that has this possiblity I think that it's a matter of lets say energetic alignment. Purifying your psychological structure until it's totally transparent, without density. It's not a matter of be good or puritan, but about your inner structures that creates a self image that need belonging, acceptation, permanece, and fear annihilation and lack of control. This seems very obvious but it's difficult, those structures are deep and strong

The main factor that makes real meditation impossible is the need for self-definition, for identification. This need is inherent to the human being; it is a mechanism of social cohesion that allows the group to function as a single entity. Real meditation is not achieved through techniques, but through stepping out of the psychological matrix of identity. The real work is not in the practice of meditation, but in self-exposure, coherence, and integrity. Loyalty to yourself as absolute value. When the psychological axis shifts from the need for self-definition and validation to integrity and transparency, the mind becomes silent. Only then does meditation make sense, as one gains access to the primordial layers of the psyche: the drive for permanence, the fear of harm and disappearance, the need for control and other bases of the human psyche Directly perceiving these underlying patterns is what eventually allows the psyche to open. “Openness” means the absence of limits. Limits define, and create a sense of control and security. The absence of limits is initially terrifying, unsustainable for more than a few seconds. The system automatically contracts again. Anyone seeking liberation must seek this rupture. At some point, it becomes more tolerable, until it is perceived as freedom. Identity is then replaced by effortless openness, as it is revealed to be a mental process. not false, but not fundamental, not absolute. Openness is not an “open mind,” but the fact of being perceiving itself without mental limitations. It is something simple and, at the same time, complete. Not definable because there are not limits. This is the state where life becomes beauty, perception becomes deep and the heart becomes open.

It's impossible that god is alone because it's unlimited. "Alone" only makes sense being limited. Alone implies others as a possibility, and for this the reality must be limited. The unlimited is not closed, then alone is not a possibility, even just teorically it's not conceivable. God alone implies that god is an individual, what implies that it's just you, the individual, thinking that you are god

Explain it

I know perfectly all those subjetive emotional appreciations, but we are talking about mental structures that open or closes. If you want to talk about subjetive view, then you are doing it in a wrong direction, you are appreciating how wonderful is the reality (free, beautiful, etc), when the point in the subjective facet, the one of the heart, is openess and surrender. Is being really open to reality for love, absolute surrender and acceptation of knowing nothing. Here we are talking about knowing because the fact of consider consciousness foundation is a total mistake (imo)

Yes, that consciousness is something with some characteristics, like being boundless, absolute beauty, don't need love, don't need a self, etc, then selfs, beauty, etc, arise in that substance, the consciousness, that is something pure, beautiful, etc, where appearances occur.

Being , that is equivalent to unlimited.

Which was never born is the fact of being manifested in unlimited possibilities. It's what have not opposite This is the non dualistic paradigm, aka the religion of XXI century, and it's much more false than any other religion. Consciousness is just the fact of reality perceiving itself. Enlightenment is the fact of the reality perceiving without limits it's absolute nature. Contracted state is the fact or the reality perceiving it's limited local structure. those divine realizations about the nature of consciousness are only useful to believe that you are immortal and give you some relief. Real thing is only for the braves, not for those who seek relief. For those there is narcissism. The absolute unlimited is what you ultimate are and being conscious or unconscious is exactly the same because it's not someone, it's open, unlimited, then the need of being conscious is a need only for the ego. The idea of reality being consciousness is an egoic idea because the ego can't conceive the absence of consciousness

Consciousness is not the seer, is an action, the action of perceiving. Perception is the reality perceiving itself. For perception happens an individual must be created, without individual there is no perception. But of course, without limits unlimited points of perception could appear, then you could say that consciousness is infinite but you can't say that consciousness is the foundation of reality as non dualistic say

What is consciousness according your vision?

he already has cancer, there was nothing to do. If a doctor would appear saying: I have a pill that will make disappear your cancer, do you want it or not? What would he answered?

Ramakrishna was visited by many doctors and he didn't like at all can't talk and get weak. There are many transcriptions of his talks with a doctor. He was in good mood for the circumstances, but without doubt he wanted to get better

It's worse when they say you're God, who is infinite, exploring the experience of being you out of love. Being infinite, he would have explored that experience and infinite other similar experiences infinite times, and if he were creating this specific experience now for some reason, he'd be a psychotic god trapped in hell.

Ramakrishna and more mystics who had cancer absolutely sure they would prefer didn't having it. They could say anything but they perceive cancer as bad.

The fact of saying that something is good implies that something is bad, so saying that everything is good makes no sense; you could say that everything is, but "good" is only a subjective perception, which lacks meaning without its opposite.

Evilness comes from fight to survival. Fighting means destroying your enemy, and this is a must in life. If anyone is in the circumstance of real fight and is absorbed by it, they will enjoy causing pain and death because means that it is you who die, not me.