Breakingthewall

Don't confuse the relative with the absolute. It's tempting to believe you are absolute and nothing can touch you if you so choose, that you can hack the game. Whoever believes that is the relative mind placing itself in an absolute position. The relative is real; it is interconnected with the totality of form and can only be aligned with, not dismissed as false. If you dismiss form as false, you create a total closure and place yourself in a dead, anesthetic void called non-duality. The absolute is alive, full and total, and it's one with the relative. In the relative there is no mercy, you have to fight, there is no guarantee, if you fail, you will be closed and isolated until death.

Sure, most of them do it, but they're wrong because they don't realize their fundamental error (or they don't want to realize). Look at Tolle, for example, who tells you that one morning he woke up and there was no more suffering or neurosis, and then he spent two years in a park doing nothing, being very happy. Then he realized that you create suffering and you can stop doing it. That's a complete mistake. What is this "you" that creates suffering? The default mode network, the limbic system, and the entire structure that creates identity, established since the first group mammals, and whose function is to hold the group together. Tolle had a short circuit in that system as self-protection against destructive suffering, and the network disconnected, and he was happy in the park without needing to be in society (which fed him). But then he claims that you are creating that suffering due to an operational error, and that if you realize your error, you can stop doing it. "You" are not a director who directs your mind; you are the mind,the entire process. The mind isn't a toy, and you're not its owner, deciding what's wrong or incorrect. Don't you see the obvious? They're creating absolute separation and calling it non-duality. "Deciding not to suffer" is the mind itself. The mind is a process that happens, not an illusion. Suffering is that process happening. The process can understand itself but it's connected with everything, it's not isolated.

I understand perfectly. They say that only the absolute is real and that the relative is unreal. They say this from the perspective of relative knowledge, therefore they themselves define their definitions as illusory. The problem is that it's also false, since relativity and separation are real because they are something that occurs. They conflate two levels that cannot be mixed because they are two aspects of the same reality: substance and form. Substance is the fact of being, form the fact of appearing. Substance is absolute, form is relative in its appearance but absolute in the sense that there is always form. They say that the absolute cannot be known, and that's a lie. The absolute knows itself through the process of division that creates consciousness and that later collapses, leaving only absolute being, which perceives itself from the perspective of the dual human being. Total openness to the absolute is total knowledge of the absolute. Total omniscience. Seriously, omniscience. Which is very simple: being is. But opening oneself to it implies everything, absolutely everything. There is nothing more; it is total. That's enlightenment, I assure you 100%. But anyway, if you don't see the mistake in the non dualistics, you won't believe me and you will see that I'm trapped in duality because I don't see that it's illusion

What i mean is that they tell people what they buy into: the self is an illusion, there is no suffering. You suffer because you want to; you (who are an illusion) are the one who decides whether to suffer or not, so you (who don't exist) can stop suffering with your (nonexistent) will. People want that, to be islands with an off switch. The problem is that they aren't That could be a kind of process of depersonalization maybe necessary to transcend the level of form, but that doesn't mean the separation isn't real. You are a human walking on a planet and have a brain. On an ontological level, you and the planet are the same: reality. But currently, a duality has been created that generates the consciousness of being human, etc. This consciousness can open to the absolute level, the fact of being conscious of being. This doesn't imply that the human is an illusion, since "illusion" is an idea that occurs in the human brain, not an absolute category.

The difference between me and them is that I make money in a business that is not the spirituality. So you think that the separate self is illusory. Why do you think that?

I saw that hundred of times same that being god etc, all that are just ideas, means absolutely nothing. This reality is, I am, and nothing else means absolutely nothing. If you open yourself to the absolute fact of being, you are open to everything. Your heart is open, your mind is unlimited, no boundaries, no definitions, no structures, just what is , what you are, the totality that is , period. What you have to do is an action, not a realization. A realization happens.to you, the action of openess is something that you do and doing so that you become, that you are. You are open, you are the openess, the unlimited. To see is to be, the subject must become the object. And the structure must disappear. No God , no dream, no consciousness, just being absolutely open without frontier. Some courage is needed, the mind will try to grab some grips, like dreams and that

You should understand that all those ideas are just ideas and honestly, in my humble opinion are wrong. Defining reality as unreal or as a dream from within reality is absurd. I've been where you are and I wondered: are they metaphors? Do these people know what they're talking about? Is it really as they say? I also used to do psychedelics brutally, hundreds of times taking very high doses. Sometimes I'd do 5-MeO, the next day mushrooms, the next day DMT, two, three, even four days a week, constantly breaking my mind, and hearing all that talk about illusion and dreams. Forget all that; it's meaningless. The point here is to leave the level where things are named and enter the level where things simply are. To delve deeply into yourself without definition, without a map, into the reality that is now. What we seek is to free the mind from its limitations, not to create new ones. In case of doubt, just think: nothing means nothing, and relax. You are, that's everything.

If you really want to get enlightened moments every day that you want, just meditating 10 minutes, you should change that mental frame, you are not creating the reality, that's a closure. You are the reality happening. It's totally absolutely different, could seems that this is irrelevant, that what anyone should do is meditate and let the ego go. Mistake. The mental frame closes, and can allow openess. At least can make it possible. But anyway, your choice

You can't understand even the more simple. It's amazing. You dont see that there is double intention, irony, etc? I'm getting desperate about posting here, it's like amazing. Anyway I like to speak about this topic, if no one understands nothing, that's life

That's good that you are condescending with silly kids like me, thanks, but I'm giving my best in every post. My level is low and maybe I deserve being expulsed, but it's what I can do. Why don't you try do correct me and teach me to be enough?

Yes but "you" giving meaning means a relationship of causality that comes from the big bang, then the first cells, the complex organisms, brains, consciousness, until the feeling of a kick in your balls that appears as "bad". Even you are god, god gives that meaning due a relationship of causality, so it could be said that things happen, nothing else

Cessation of ego has to relationship is a myth and it wouldn't mean enlightenment,are different planes or dimensions. It's common to confuse both and thinking that enlightenment means having no preferences. It's bit more nuanced, it's placed yourself in a level where there are no differences, for a while. In the plane where only being is. Just to align your ego and be form perceiving the unlimited

What you call ego is a psychological structure, software generated by hardware created over 4 billion years of biological evolution that creates an experience and gives it meaning. "Reality" is two rocks colliding in space and also the experience of fear you had with LSD. There isn't an ego on one side and reality on the other; rather, the ego is reality in ego mode. Fear or suffering are the emotional burdens that give experience an absolute vector toward survival. If you operate on your brain and eliminate the circuits that make something important, nothing will matter, and that will be reality. Now, with those circuits, the reality is that it's important not to be eaten by lions. Reality is what it is, period.

Truth is the absence of deception. Absolute truth is the absence of structure, because any structure would be relative truth.

The separate self exist, is a biological reality, a psychological structure, not an illusion. Those people are mixing the absolute with the relative, that's why all the spiritual teachings are a mess that only lead to confusion. What is certain is that a dense self impedes or hinders openness, while an aligned, clean, transparent ego structure, free of lies and contradictions, allows it or makes it easier. The point is that the absolute and the relative are two aspects of the same reality; neither is false. The one who wants to open up to the absolute is the relative self, and wants to do so to stop fearing and living in lack. You intuitively understand that it closes and you gradually refine your psychic structure, but there is always a human self that knows it is an organism that must be preserved. To say that this is an illusion is absolutely wrong, who defines illusion? The "illusion" itself. That's a mess that trap everyone. Anyway, this is the spirituality that has been successful . No one achieve openess, but it's still believed. For example, don't you detect that adyashanti is full of lie? It smell from kilometers. We could do an analysis if you want. Also Tolle, or Ralston. It's totally obvious

Well, if they mean that the fact of being is the same independent of what happens then could be, but it's a formulation that leads to confusion, and from my intuition its real goal is appearing special, not real communication. Ego doesn't disappear by the fact of being open to the absolute because ego is a real human structure, not a dream or a thought. It's a structure that comes from the evolution of the social mammals, and those holy teachers want to be alpha by spirituality Definitions are a tool to allow the real actual openess to the absolute. Some nuances close, others allows openness. Any definition belongs to the relative, it's made by opposition. The absolute is precisely absolute, it's just the fact of being , but this implies everything, it's total. If you can really open yourself to it you will see it without doubt, the problem is that human structure closes by default by focusing in the relative, it's inevitable. Then you have to do a very subtle work to clean any closure. Then everything seems very easy and obvious, but before seemed a mystery

Because saying that it has infinite hability implies someone doing something, when the unlimited happens inevitably because there aren't absolute limits, not because it "wants". The difference is crucial, one closes, another opens. "Happening" and "being" are indivisible Beauty, love, perfection, freedom, are ideas that happen in the human relative form that points to the fact of absence of limitations. If you take it as absolute definitions, your mind get closed. "Beauty" means absence of flaw, freedom absence of boundaries, love absence of rejection . All of them means absence of limitations. If you are open to the absolute, there is only openess, absolute being. Then from the comparative mind you could say that of perfection etc, but it's confusing.

Relative change is not happening "within the changeless", like if the changeless is something that creates an illusion, or a container "where" the change happens. That's the dualism called non duality. The changeless is the inherent property of the change and the change the inevitable manifestation of the changeless. You could say that the changeless is the substance and the change the form, but substance and form are one. It's like saying: a knife is not real because really it's iron, not a knife. If you are a teacher and this is your teaching, you are teaching just confusión. Most of those teachers talk to appear superior, even they don't know it. Traditionally (and now) they were dependent from the support of the people who admires and respected them, so appear "cute mysterious holy" was (is) a must. The absolute is the fact of being, that is inherent to any existence. The relative is the actual manifestation of that fact. The problem (being human) is that due our emotional nature we are totally absorbed by the relative form. "Enlightenment" means putting aside the relative, deactivate for a while it emotional charge and being totally open to the absolute fact of being without any structure or limit. You could call it "perfection", "love", blahbla but really "perfection" means just absence of imperfection, then better calling if total, less confusing. That doesn't mean denying the form because denying the form happen from the form 😅 this is so obvious that makes me sick. Really I can't avoid to react when I read those explanations.

I did a thread yesterday titled "a meditation", I think the explanation could be there. Indescribable mystery....no, that's obvious reality. Absolutely obvious, zero mystery, you can be absolutely open to it exactly now. You can do in every day

Means: I'm special and you aren't. Adya is special and do cute don't you think? So holy. Look, "happen" is a succession of causality, relative change. If you say: "There seems to be change, but I, being so cute, know that there isn't really any, since being is immutable," you're confusing the relative with the absolute. At an absolute level, there is no change because being simply is, period. At a relative level, there is always change because being expresses itself in constant relational flux. Real means that is, then according bohr those things aren't? If reality is ultimately a mathematical possibility unfolding, that doesn't mean it isn't real; rather, that this is reality. The problem with these people is that they don't understand that the real/unreal dichotomy occurs within reality; in fact, it occurs within your conceptual mind, which is an expression of reality. Therefore, it is a fundamental error to make that relative distinction about the absolute within the absolute. Einstein also was soooo cute and special. Lovely Einstein with genius haircut. He wrote this quote in a letter of condolence to the family of his close friend Michele Besso, who had just died. Einstein was already old and ill (he would die a month later). He tried to use Minkowski's spacetime physics to offer a poetic consolation: "Do not be sad, Michele still exists in the four-dimensional block, the past is not lost." The motive was let's say "noble", but the choice of the word "illusion" was... well. I wouldn't like to receive that letter, it's an insult (from my humble opinion) Anyway, In the theory of Relativity, time is another dimension. The past, present, and future exist together in a four-dimensional geometry (the so-called Block Universe). From the perspective of pure mathematical equations, there is no preferred arrow of time. But to jump from there to saying that time is an illusion is foolish. The separation between past and future exists and operates within the software of thermodynamics. Causality is a fact, calling it illusion is just a mental distinction that happens in the causality. That's obvious right? Of course, we are the reality happening Of course, that's obvious . Subject and object are something that appears in this dimension of being that we call life or consciousness. It is perfectly obvious that the subject and the object are the same: reality, which splits in two to perceive itself. You are the eye of reality looking at itself, and that eye observes itself. This fact is a reality occurring, not an illusion. "Illusion" is only a concept that appears within the observing structure, therefore it cannot define the whole. Please....this potentiality is precisely the reality. They use the word "reality" like "solid" or "definitive". Real means that exists, That is. I think that they tried to explain a mathematical concept to the public using common language without being focused in the real precision of language

Spirituality imprisons you because it tells you that form is a dream, an illusion, or a falsehood, and in doing so, it fragments you. If you are fragmented, you cannot broaden your focus. Form and substance are one; there is no being without form, nor form without being. The issue is not denying form as unreal, but rather placing it in the background, when by default it is in a total and all-consuming foreground. Statements like "the self is unreal" place you on the plane of real vs. unreal. The self simply is. Like anything else. Unreal or real are at the level of form; at the level of absolute being, there is absolute being.

Sit down and focus your attention on the fact of being now, of existing. Not on your breath, since that divides you between subject and object; it will never work. Nor on your thoughts, since that places you as an external observer of your thoughts, which are forms you take, not forms you see. They are you being a thought. So, focus on the fact of being. Not on consciousness, since consciousness is being aware, a relationship between two states, the possibility of being conscious or not. Forget consciousness, dreams and ego. Forget everything except the actual fact of being. This now is the fact of being, without any definition except that it is. Now there is no breath, no consciousness, no thoughts; there is the fact of being. Everything is the fact of being. Then the boundaries fall away; you slip in an instant from form to substance. In substance, there are no differences; you are, period. Being reveals itself as total, unfathomable, and full of power. It is, and in the fact of being it's affirmative, and its joy is absolute because nothing limits it, there is not stain, it's absolutely clean, bottomless and perfect. It has no beginning and no end; it is inevitable, total, absolute, and it is exactly what you are. Simple. In fact, absolutely simple.

You choose it when it happens, same than someone choose being a toxic narcissist, it happens. It's the drive of what you are. Maybe for you 5 meo is nothing, worthless. It depends of your psychological structure. Seems that yours is low density, natural for spirituality. That's why your intuition detects the mistakes without a lot of mental analysis. For most of people that's impossible, they believe what sounds safe for their ego and they integrate that structure in their psyche. Imo the real problem in spirituality is that the teachers aren't accurate, all of them make mistakes that trap the minds About 5 meo what I was seeking is the act of disintegrating my psyche and its subsequent reintegration, over and over again. I wasn't looking to see God or anything like that; I was looking to completely break down my psychological structure and gradually understand what it was, so I could be free, able to dissolve its barriers at will. The psyche is not just thoughts, are energetic structures that make you being yourself, it's very difficult to understand from inside, 5 meo gives the possibility of seeing from outside

I like to contrast view with anyone interested in spirituality, but some people are unbearable, only ego, too narrow mind. Anyway it's interesting to see the psychology of people that is involved in this topic. Any interaction shows new nuances

I shouldn't answer , you are like a kid. Last answer.