Breakingthewall

You could do that but to me it seems oo waste the potential of this form is to disregard it and remain in the openness of being total. The perfect move is to achieve that openness at will and then perceive yourself as form, but always with a density low enough so that the absolute is perceived in every moment. Then the absolute and form are a synergy, not two opposites.

From my perspective there is a kind of mistake or maybe a contradiction there, maybe you will agree or not The nature of reality, what reality is, is absolute being, that is, the fact of being that has no opposite in non-being, since non-being is not. So, if you open yourself to your total nature, you realize that you are that, you are the fact of being. This is not something neutral; it is positive and alive, full, plenitude, everything, as you know. But it's ' positive" in the sense that it is affirmative, that it is, and alive in the sense that it exists, and this existence manifest inevitably in relational flow. This "positive" has zero relation to positive according to a local perspective programmed to prefer A over B. The suffering derived from this is also positive, because it is. From the perspective of total being, there is no difference between being a homeless guy with five cancers being eaten by rats while their parents laugh at him and a cyborg sentient being who dominates the universe. Both are, both exist, period. The difference is local, not essential. But the reality is that from the local perspective, form exists, relational flow occurs, and it creates patterns of brutal complexity and enormous beauty. This pattern that we are can be understood and aligned in a huge level. Maybe there is a kind of continuity after death, it's impossible to know, but seems that this cycle that is happening has a drive, points in a direction. From an absolute perspective maybe it's irrelevant, but from a local perspective it's absolutely relevant, every movement has consequence, cause and effect that unfolds beyond our understanding. So what I mean is that even the nature of everything is immutable and absolute, it's manifestation is cause effect relationship and always it's going to be, because existing implies manifestation. There is no being without happening, it's not a possibility.

I think that usually people get interested in spirituality because they suffer, they can't adapt, they can't find their place in the world, or a tragedy has befallen them that they can't cope with, so they turn to spirituality. The problem is that spirituality is a mess and is explained terribly. Current spirituality is a kind of dissociative anesthetic in which the person identifies with something larger, consciousness, which doesn't suffer but rather suffering happens within it, parallel to Tolle's ideas that tell you that suffering over the past or the future is a mistake because right now there is no problem. So you can escape the mental error that is the ego simply by becoming aware of it. This is false, it doesn't work. It's a scam.

They suffer more because their spirituality is false, they are in a mental mess thinking that the power of now is the truth and that you shouldn't suffer because a zebra doesn't suffer thinking about the future, while they are totally closed to the reality that they are. If you are open to the actual reality that is, every moment feels alive and full, there are no regrets because you act straight by default, relationship are clean without friction because freedom and truth are natural for you, and lie and submission are impossible, and death is seen as the open heart of reality where you are going to dissolve to be one with it. The point is not avoiding suffering, it's being worthy. You are not a bitch that want confort and anesthesia, you are the living reality manifested in a form full of potential and what you want is developing it as much as it's possible, give your best, be one with what is.

Don't go to those camps if you don't want to find there bentinho massaro or similar telling you that for enlightenment you have to suck his magic dick. all this area is plenty of scammers and psychopaths.

It's not about versions but about an action that can be done.

The seer and what's seen are the same thing then the seer can see itself easily. Or not so easily but possible. Step one, removing everything except the fact of I am. The self knowing that is , nothing else. This I am is empty of content but has still structure, then it's closed. Step two. Dissolution of this structure. There is no more I am, no self being conscious of itself. "Consciousness" become meaningless. There is what is, no subject and object. Of course there is still consciousness because we are conscious beings but what disappear is the awareness of being aware. Zero structure, then absolute being reveals itself. The seer sees itself totally.

Imo Ideas are like anything else, something that happens. Spirituality seems to say: ideas are false, sensations are true, when both are in the same dimension, that of processes, causality, what happens. Perhaps you could say that sensations are more vivid and ideas more subdued, and that they distance you further from the dimension of absolute being. I would say that's true, but at the same time, they are the key to opening up to total absolute being. Without the mental representation that your life is a trap and that you have to make a change in frequency, the necessary action wouldn't occur. The issue isn't that sensations or ideas are maya, or false, or whatever, but that they are the dimension of form. There's no problem with this dimension except that in the human configuration, it leads to an almost total closure to the perception of "substance". Substance is not something, is the fact of being and this fact of being recognizes itself through the self as absolute and immortal (veganawake would think now: another identity of grandiosity) . You are not immortal as form, but as the fact of being, and from this perspective, form is perceived as secondary, not as false or illusory, because the perceiver of the form is the form. There is not a witness out of the experience, the experience implies the witness, and It is perceived as what it is: form. But the form is the substance in a form. There are not two, are one, but the form usually gets blind to it's nature, closes itself to it putting the form as essential veiling the essential reality of being. As much as you adapt to the inevitable rules of society, to the need of adaptation, you get more and more veiled, enclosed in a barrier that blinds you totally from what you are. That feels very bad, anxiety and sadness by default The better way (imo)for us, civilized humans trapped in the gray, dull, lifeless ego, is total openness to substance, the complete transcendence of the ego for a few moments as often as you can. This completely changes the frequency of the ego. It gives it life, and by giving it life, it gives it purpose. Its purpose is the same as that of anything else: to exist. The ego, enlightened by the full light of the unlimited fact of being, changes frequency; it ceases to be a line that moves forward and becomes an actual reality that is. The difference is total.

What is the essential truth? What identities are false?

An operative center that arises in an organism, a center that is conscious of itself, that knows that is, and that predict possibilities and choose the best option possible in every moment, processing the past and the present through the filter of its evolutive conditioning to achieve a future with the most optimal conditios possible. I wouldn't call it illusion, just self.

Agree, that's the real point , being open to the reality of what being is. Imo illusion is a misleading term, would be better being trapped in the form. It's not false, it's a dimension of reality. We as self conscious minds are conscious of the process that is happening and of its interactions, but we can also be conscious of the nature of this process. Being conscious of the nature of being is achieved being it without barriers, and that's not easy because this self conscious mind is not designed by evolution for this opening, but it's possible , as you described when Newman says that bodies are empty, maybe he doesn't understand that bodies itself are the reality happening. It's not that they are empty or full, it's that this process that the body is is the reality happening. It's existence existing. The self that appears is a dynamic model of the universe that this process that we call human creates to survive, the mind, that is also the existence existing, and it can realize of its real nature. It's quite simple imo, the question is if Newman have realized that nature. For him it's nothing, then I would say that not, because reality is.

Enlightenment is the openess to what reality is, not a realization about what reality is. You don't need to die or appear like so special and mystic. From a logical perspective, it's extremely simple: What reality is is the fact of being. But being totally open to it is not so simple because the system that a human is is programmed by evolution to close. the fact of being is not an entity, it has no form or limits, it's not exactly infinite, it's unlimited, if we want to express proper concepts . But it's everything, if you are open to it, nothing else is lack. But you can't be totally open to it always, and who wants that? We are humans, then let's play deep. Enlightenment is essential to play as deep as being human deserves.

Yes I mean letting go the mental structures at will for a while, mental structures are necessary. The point is making them transparent as you said

Yes those are the typical traps. Seeing in the dark is useful but this isn't enlightenment, same that remote vision. Nice anyway.

No worries, I know that I'm telling that spirituality that is spread is mistaken in the basis and that sounds like I want to feel superior I guess that it depends of how anyone represent those ideas , but for me are confusing. If I say that reality is nothing and that nothing has ever happened, what do I achieve? I understand the idea; it's about making form transparent, irrelevant, nonexistent, and thus ceasing to be trapped by it. But for me, that doesn't work because form actually traps you completely in different ways. Not only the fear of death, but also, for example, the need to define who you are, what reality is, etc. So, if you deny the existence of the self, it would be like facing an enemy in a duel to the death and repeating: "I'm not afraid, he's nothing, I'm not afraid." All well and good, but then the moment of the duel arrives, and reality imposes itself. Your enemy is there with a big knife, and you feel an overwhelming urge to defecate. The self is the same, it's very real, the point is not knowing that the self doesn't exist, is facing it directly to be able to put it in the background, and be totally open to what is, the living reality, absolute being, the power that underlies everything, the affirmative fact of being, the light that illuminates the depressing black and white 2D film and makes it real and alive, etc. etc. Call it what you want. This is a total absolute change is the experience. Not for a moment, but always. It doesn't happen but step by step, it's a change of phase of existing as a human, a liberation of a prison that all humans build by default

Spirituality is letting go of your mental structures and being open to the actual, to what is, the living reality. It's not about learning a new cosmology, but about breaking down the barriers that prevent you to do this. Spirituality is an action, not a realization, and that action isn't easy because your entire system is oriented in the opposite direction by default.

Ok but also you could assume that they are just relationship, then you don't put a closure in them . Then that closure happens in your mental frame, making it circular, closed. At least it would happen in my mental frame if I would assume that This doesn't mean that Im inventing a mental frame that's open because it's more convenient, it means that if reality is open, a mental frame that's true can't be closed

Doing that mental frame you are creating a separation between you, the observer, and the voice that talks, and there isn't, it's the reality in the form of a thought and you are that. It's irrelevant where that voice comes from, comes from the unlimited line of causality of the reality, same than anything else. It doesn't come from the void, comes from the big bang, and the big bang comes from another cause. If we assume that absolute limits are impossible, a beginning is impossible

Absolute being is not a being that is absolute, but rather the absolute fact of being. A conceptual framework that allows you to open yourself to this reality without restrictions should not describe absolute being, but rather avoid confining you to relative manifestation. "Dream" confines you to the relative because it implies a dreamer, another, more real reality, and implies a relationship between two realities.

I suppose you know that you're frying the emotional circuits of your mind on a thousands-of-watt electric grill, and that there's a tipping point where your system is fried and everything can easily turns let's say horrible

I never would do this and I think it's very dangerous. You don't know how will you react to 5meo . Some people have very strong defenses, it could be a really horrible experience and you could die.

I exist. If you doubt it I challenge you to a trial by combat. The one who lives is who exist. Choose your weapons. Logical weapons if you want

If that's true solipsism is false, and if there are another gods no one is a god because any creation would be limited by the other gods.

Any conceptual description in this context serves the purpose of not acting as a barrier to openness to absolute being. For this to happen, the essential element is the complete absence of contradiction or closure. Every description must be open. For example: reality exists, and what appears is reality existing, a possibility in being. This leaves room for openness in all directions; it is unnecessary to define anything as dream, unreal, or empty. The point is that your conceptual frame let's you to open yourself to the absolute being. This is not a knowledge or a realization, it's a movement that happens now that opens yourself to the absolute dimension of being.

Why? I think things are much simpler. They are what they seem: possibilities unfolding, not dreams. The goal isn't to define experience differently, but rather for experience to be open to its essential nature, not focused entirely on survival conditioning, that includes the social inevitable conditioning