Breakingthewall

Plus Means that If we're talking about serious epistemology, in order to say "I am God," you should at least be able to create a couple of galaxies, or better yet, a universe with a different geometry, shrink it to the size of a marble, and put it on the table as proof.

Enlightenment is what Ramana Maharshi, Basul, and many others spoke of. Sit in meditation and ask: What am I? What is reality? Don't ask with logic, nor answer with logic, but become the question. Be the question that pierces reality. What is reality? Observe, without mind. What is this? No logic will tell you; forget logic, it is irrelevant. Here and now, in absolute silence, what is this? Without fear, without projection, without any desire other than to see, then forget that desire, because desire leads you to the door but you can't pass with it, it's ultimately a door. Feel this moment without borders or bottom, relax all the contraction that defines you as an individual, relax your desire to be you, observe. What is this? Then it opens. You are that. It is unthinkable. Just do it, it's an action that you have to do, not a realization that you have to know. It's the end of the lack.

That's a logical deduction you've made, which you believe is correct. Saying the opposite is just as correct. Perhaps it offers you some comfort by deactivating the part of your mind that assigns importance to things, thus enabling survival, but this has no relation to enlightenment it's just an statement that is true for you. Could be the case that you are immortal and you are going to reincarnate eternally in infinite lifes and knowing that wouldn't mean enlightenment. Even knowing every life and knowing that you are dreaming it or whatever, and be omnipotent wouldn't be enlightenment

Maybe your mind never ceases, but in deep meditation mind ceases. Try to understand what is said instead of argue. Well, no because your purpose is only being above. Boring.

When the mind ceases and interpretation is zero, there is still a barrier that keeps you closed off. I call it the desire to be. This is not something mental or an idea, but a stable energetic vibration that maintains the image of oneness. You can feel it in your body, in your entire reality. When the mind is empty of content, you can observe this energetic structure and be one with it, not escape it or try to negate or dissolve it, but merge into it. Then, at a certain moment, it ceases, and the total manifests. That is the game; it is an action, an energetic movement that occurs when all resistance ceases.

Nothing matters is an appreciation that is opposite to something matters, is just a judgement that happens in your mind.

"A dream" is a conceptual idea, same that non duality that this man is talking about . Emptiness , form, beginning , etc all are just ideas. Enlightenment in an action that happens now. No a definition or a realization of a cosmic joke. It's the openess of the actual moment revealing what can't be thought because has no limits.

That simply means the meaning ceases to be relevant to you, nothing more. For example, in your case, if they tell you that tomorrow you're going to enter a Nigerian prison for life, that would mean nothing to you; you'd be just as happy as winning the lottery, and that's fine, but it doesn't signify enlightenment. Look, you are, that's undeniable. The present moment is, or the reality is if you prefer. In your case, you're someone for whom being tortured by the Inquisition for two years or eating ice cream is the same thing; in my case, that's not so. But that doesn't mean anything in relation to the matter of enlightenment. The fact is that our experience, the now, this instant, occurs in a dense, opaque form. Enlightenment is the opening of that density, the fracturing of becoming, and the basic emotional contraction of the desire to be. This can happen in just a moment; it's an energetic shift, and in it, what reality is manifests. The total, period. Life and death occur in becoming. I and others are the same; the total cannot be defined or thought, it is what reality is. It's not the same than your normal experience but without the illusion of the self, it's not becoming, it's the self, the structure or form that reality is creating now opening itself to what reality is.

Yes, I understand, it's a joke that only a few selected people understand, the awakened. But look, it is just a mental structure. "Recognized", even it's by nothing, it's comparison. "Nothing" is comparing illusion with real. And "nothing" realizes that the self was an Illusion . Just knowledge, mind.

So you know that there is not anybody to surrender because the self was an illusion, then, as you know that, you are awake. Who? The one who knows that the self was an illusion?

The matter is difficult because it is the self that wants to let go of the self. So, instead of breaking it down, it elevates it to the status of a god, or the status of illusion. The true path is not conceptual, not a structure, but requires the direct observation of the contraction that constitutes you as a self, without denying it or thinking it is an illusion, since this label is just another structure. If you observe your contraction, feel it, become one with it, at a certain point it ceases, it opens up, and in doing so, the totality is revealed. The totality is unthinkable because it is total, and the fact that the totality opens up for you does not imply that you are "enlightened," since afterward it closes and becomes an idea.

It depends. If the regular army were to displace the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which, besides being the guarantor of the regime, wields enormous economic power that many would like to share, and were to reach an agreement with the US, Iran would enter a period of great economic prosperity. If this were to happen today, Iran's economy would take off in just a few months. If something is so advantageous, many influential players will be waiting for their opportunity. It would be surprising if the best solution for everyone didn't prevail.

China thinks In a 20-year plan, not in emotional responses. What would get china conquering Taiwan? It's much better threatening about conquering Taiwan. China's number one ally is the US, and the US's number one ally is China. They can't live without each other; they're like two lovers dancing an Argentine tango, or perhaps more like a couple with children tired of each other but knowing that divorce is out of the question, as it would be ruinous. If Iran blocks the Strait of Hormuz, the third world war you're talking about will be everyone against Iran, and Iran will loose that war.

Its not a state of evil, it's just a state in their beginning. That's how humanity works: the strong survive, the weak don't. Every state has been founded on war, so the respect I was referring to is the very intelligent way of waging hybrid warfare. I would say that they should earn the respect of his neighbors, something he wouldn't do with friendly gestures, since he would be devoured, as the law of life dictates. So you think that the Iranian regime hates Israel due emotional reasons, because the Iranians are very worried and sad about the Palestinian, and they remember that secret police, that was bad, not like the actual secret police, that is good. Well, it's your right to think in that way but I think that you are misinterpreting the real reasons I think that the Iranian regime hates Israel due the fight for the supremacy in the area and over all because being the declared enemy of Israel brings influence in the Muslim world and legitimate his oppression to the Iranian people

Jiang desires so hardly the fall of US that he really believes the worst scenario possible, but that would be absolute political suicide for Iran, handing Israel the key to legitimacy in the Gulf. The fanaticism of Muslim regimes is always overestimated, when they are usually corrupt regimes that only seek to perpetuate themselves in power, like any other dictatorship. Power is power, it's equal for everyone. Have they filled the Strait of Hormuz with mines in revenge for the assassination of the Ayatollah? Why haven't they destroyed any desalination plants yet? What are they waiting for? I think that anyone in Iran who ask himself: what is the better option in all senses now? Would answer: change. Because the other options are catastrophic

I think it was, but we never will know it.

Most likely, the regular army will take command, displace the revolutionary guard, and there will be a regime change in a few days, and that this was planned from the beginning by Israel. It's the only logical possibility. Israel is not impulsive, they are smart as hell and merciless. And after this, the Arabs countries will recognize the state of Israel. I'm not supporting Israel, I bet a lot that they allowed the 8 October to destroy gaza, then attac irán and then annex the West Bank and create Great Israel, completely eliminating the possibility of a Palestinian state. But when someone is Machiavellian and succeeds at this level, I can't help but have absolute respect for their courage and effectiveness, even recognizing that he's absolutely evil. That's how history is made.

After the fall of the Ottoman Empire, new countries were created, and as is inevitable, wars became endemic, as happened in Europe for so many centuries. The US is a stabilizing agent, whether you like it or not. Without the US, Iran, Iraq, turkey, Egypt, Syria, would have fought for power, conquering other countries and clashing incessantly. The US doesn't act as a peacemaker out of kindness, obviously, but because the region has oil, which is essential to the global economy. It's unacceptable that the most valuable resource is in the hands of medieval warlords, or if you prefer, kingdoms like European of XIX century. If the US hadn't been the dominant power, it would have been the USSR, China, or whoever had the military capacity to impose order. Perhaps you think the world today is horrible and the West a malevolent demon. Who are you comparing them to? The Ottoman Empire? Perhaps Japan imperial? If power becomes vacant, who fills it? Righteous saints seeking justice? Saddam Hussein? Gaddafi? The west and the east. Ottoman, Chinese, japan. Chinese just in china of course, but china is an empire, and civil wars caused 25 million of deaths in short periods sometimes. You focus your attention in west empire because it is what remains, not because it's the only I don't hate islam, I think it's a stupidity that is a burden on humanity. It's like if England had a Mormon dictatorship obsessed with preventing people from masturbating because baby Jesus cries, and promoting cousin marriage to lower IQ. I'd think it was utter stupidity. Mental freedom is essential, but it's just my opinion. Of course, a lot of tension and human greed, balance is difficult. It doesn't mean that china is gandalf the white fighting against sauron the black America Satan. Don't you see that it's a miopic view? Russia cooperates because was weak, when it was strong, it conquered east Europe and submit it with iron fist. Sure and US did the same with Marshall plan and more , China dominates with a soft touch because it can't do so with an iron fist, like with the Uyghurs. It's like when Orange calls you to try and get you to leave Vodafone, all friendly gestures. But when Orange is a monopoly, things aren't so friendly anymore. Sure, cooperate after 25 years saying America Satan and then falsifying an elections. Maybe US want capitulation according to your view, but Saudi Arabia for example has the right to sell oil to china if they want, have sharia as main law, join brics, etc. Is it capitulation? No, it's simply that the strongest empire at the moment will not leave its economy in the hands of unpredictable actors. The transition must be smooth, not abrupt. Direct confrontation is not the intelligent solution.

Sure, but those political decisions include expanding its area of influence, financing terrorism and guerrilla groups like Hezbollah, Hamas, the Polisario Front in Morocco, and basically anything that weakens its Sunni enemies, making it an aggressive actor trying to dominate the region. So it's normal that other countries do the same and that clashes occur. According to you, the Iranian regime is legitimate and the other Arab regimes and Israel are not. Well, that's your opinion. The reality is that in that region, what matters isn't who is more legitimate, but who is stronger. Seems that for you irán and everyone who fights again the great Satan is noble and fair, in Iran they celebrate free elections, Hamas are noble fighters, etc. Well, it's a way to see it, but it's not very objetive. If you listen other people who's in than frequency, you are in a echo chamber and in a giving moment you could think that the ayatollah regime is a feminist democracy that is in poverty due the Americans and bibi

Then , since there was a Western-backed coup in 1953, amidst the tensions of the Cold War. Twenty-six years later, when Iran had a flourishing economy and a developing liberal society, the ayatollahs staged a coup, establishing an Islamic theocracy. The reason for this was the coup that had occurred 26 years earlier. So why didn't they reinstate democracy? Let me guess: because America Satan

If a global power controls the economy in great stent, and you're a weak country with resources, and your core values are hatred of that power and the disappearance of its ally as a nation, you risk this kind of thing. The US doesn't steal oil from Saudi Arabia or the UAE; in fact, they sell a large portion of their oil to China. But what a global power won't tolerate is a direct challenge sustained for decades. What would be Iran's problem if it recognized Israel, engaged in dialogue with the US, and acknowledged them as partners? Simply an identity crisis. You could say: the US is a state that steals resources from other states, leaving them in poverty. But this isn't true. If Iran were to cooperate, its economy would improve. The problem is that many Muslim countries base their identity on direct confrontation. Without it, their identity collapses. Obviously, the US is abusive in many ways, but so is China when it benefits from it, as is France in Africa, Russia when it has the opportunity, and all the others. The point is not categorize us as Satan but trying to get the best deals possible for your people

It seems logical that the Iranian people would want regime change after 47 years of theocracy. It's a rather dystopian situation in which the ruling elites have no secondary education, only Koranic schooling. Instead of focusing on economic and social development, they focus on the destruction of the Israeli Satan, that has no direct relationship with them. It's safe to assume that many people might consider this a misguided approach.

If a Muslim government collaborates with the West, as Saudi Arabia, the Emirates, and Morocco do, it's not so dramatic, is it? What is the need for people like Saddam, the ayatollahs, or Gaddafi to constantly challenge power? Perhaps they seek the freedom of their people against the evil aggressor? Or could it be that they can't sleep thinking about the Palestinians they are expelling from their lands? Perhaps, but it seems more like something else. Since they are dictators who have seized power by force and subjugate their people by carrying out massacres at the slightest sign of political opposition, anti-American rhetoric makes them appear as noble Davids facing the avaricious, hook-nosed Goliath, and thus their people, who have the mental development of an 11-year-old, love them and see them as legitimate. Sure, Gaddafi was in his right trying do displace the us dollar creating the dirham gold. And maybe Saddam was right launching scuds to Israel and invading Kuwait, but the point is that you frontally challenge the power, then what do you expect? Hugs? Or maybe that they say: oh well, it's their right, we are evil Jews and we should let them displace the dollar, because it's fair and our hearts are pure and noble, so justice is first, or interest is second, we are the Knights of the Round Table defending orphans. Well, it seems the world doesn't work that way. Knowing it, declaring that Israel must disappear of the map and burning American flags every day seems good to fool fools, but bad for feed your people

Why would do it? To laugh while petting cats? In other hand, it seems very convenient for the Iranians to show the evilness of the demons. A school of little girls. Sure. Well, not sure, just 99% sure

Who believes that nonsense about the girls? The Iranians say that to smear the Israelis, and the newspapers repeat it like parrots because that's what people want to hear.