RMQualtrough

Legitimately please try to describe what thing is objectively out there beyond perceptions. Please give it a go, suggest something out there that exists independent of perception.

You are nothing, there is nothing to reincarnate. This isn't just magical mystery spooky-sounding stuff to seem woke. "I" is literally nothing. If this is discomforting put it in a way a human can understand: Have you EVER experienced non-existence or unconsciousness? If not, why assume that it's even a possibility that there is such a thing? Don't make assumptions. You always existed and always will, always were conscious and always will be.

There's no such thing as a past or a future. When you read a book, do you assume the prior pages cease to exist or that the future ones do not yet exist? See, all time is, is the experiencing of an already-written book in linear fashion. Past pages is only a reality from the point of view of the reader going through the book linearly. If all pages are superimposed on top of each other into one single page, there's no such thing. See going to school isn't something that existeD, it's something that existS. NOW. It is right now. It is the finite mind that sees it as a past etc because the finite mind is localized inside spacetime.

@RendHeaven They would be ruder than that as those types are not nice people. But it is actually proveable, because you only have to ask them to describe what those objective things ARE. As soon as they suggest any possible thing, it is a perception. If all things that perceive red disappear, where is red? Red cannot be what is really out there because it relies on perception. If all creatures were blind there would be no manifested visual world. Anything that is something relies on perception. So maybe an alien can't see, it can only hear, and navigates the "physical world" by sound. It would be wrong for it to presume that light is NOT a perception just because from ITS finite mind it cannot detect it. But I can. And to my finite mind it is a perception. See we use the perceptions of other things to find things that our finite mind does not itself perceive, and conclude falsely, that the thing is not a perception. See like, we might try to do such a thing with radiowaves or infrared or electricity, and say they are not perceptions because we do not perceive them. But we only know them through sensors which do, and which convert it into something a human mind can see feel touch hear... Like if I were used by the aliens to detect light. Maybe I make a sound whenever I see light, I'm converting perception into one that they can interact with. You know, assume I am wrong as best as you can, and TRY to describe what is objectively out there beyond perception. Try your absolute best to say what is objectively out there that is independent. Information represents things like numbers do, you need to describe what the "things" objectively are.

All realities can only manifest into existence by way of consciousness. When discussing a universe devoid of consciousness, but with floating chairs, that is not possible, because a chair is a perception. A chair is made of seeing, feeling, etc. And seeing and feeling can only be done by a perceiver. Everything is fundamentally nothing, and presents as something via perception alone. To say that an unconscious universe of floating chairs exists, is like saying that the world of your dreams exists when you wake up. The dream vanishes when not perceived. Because it is nothing. All things are nothing. Consciousness itself is absolute total sheer nothing. It isn't ANY kind of something. It is literal nothingness in the truest sense of the word. It is just that perception does not exist without perceiver. So wherevee there is perception, there is an illusory "perceiver" that exists because it comes WITH the perception. But the perceiver is nothingness. As is all somethings when robbed of perception.

Without experience is no experiencer. At the beginning of the universe there were no consciois minds to observe it. It would be a state of "cessation" like universal general anaesthesia. But still all of these existent things like light and matter were happening... Evidently living material things have evolved to have a conscious experience of the environment creating an experience and experiencer. People have issue with the fact that anaesthesia or destroying the brain causes cessation. But cessation/nothingness is the true nature of all reality. That is what we actually all are, it's the default and the Absolute. Rather than these sense organs creating the qualia of color and such, is it just revealing or tapping into it? Are there infinite colors? Infinite sounds? Infinite qualia including things we cannot ever access? When a bat uses sonar what is sonar like from the inside? We can see what it is like from the outside with electrical currents in the brain, and determine how far in terms of physical distance it functions, but nothing of what it is like from inside the bat. Is that just one example of infinite qualia that can exist whenever "experience" and hence then "experiencer" is created? Did humans used to see blue as some other color but it wasn't evolutionarily beneficial? How do you suppose the brain is tapping into these things? Without a physical brain there is no separation or experience from this PoV, just cessation (nothingness, the default and true nature of reality). If all brains cease to exist and all experience ceases to exist, there is still a big bang etc?

@Pacific Sage Isn't it any act of observation at all even if performed by a robot?

Think exactly like a dream. In a dream the landscape around your character is in actuality not separate to the character because it is one unit, dreamt up by one mind. Waking reality is exactly the same as that but as a shared dream (multiple characters).

The 5-MeO experience is the truth if the person enters the void. What is added onto that, I believe. I think it can be proven. But that state of absolute beingness it's no belief. It's the reason if someone says "do you exist" you don't even need a nanosecond to know "yes" but why? There's a backdrop working back there silently... I think it can be shown via other means that there is no real external world etc (it's real so far as a dreamscape is).

No. Their behaviour won't change. I have found more understanding in the inaccurate term WE are Brahman. Simply because we know our lives through limited parts of the whole. There is only one "I", but many separate experiences. Groups of experience we tend to give labels like "human" or "dog" or "cat". It is all consciousness but we experience life AS the human, dog, or cat. So for sake of understanding and not thinking you can control others etc it is best to know no boundary but think and act from the paradigm of boundary.

Do you see the problem? We are arriving at truth without making ANY assumptions. The assumption there is any experience of sight happening that is not found in the field of awareness cannot be verified. It is an assumption. It has nothing to do with whether or not there are "others" it is about whether there is an experience of qualia that I am not aware of, or anything like that. Total pre-rational thought works like that in every other way. Evidently others are me. This is not the topic of discussion. Yes they are me and space appears in me and time appears in me. But I cannot say there is seeing or feeling or hearing other than that of which I am aware. I'd like to see a refutation.

I think the "subjective experience" part is what is being discussed. I am Leo yadda yadda, but I can only verify the experience of seeing one field of vision.

It is my direct experience that seeing is taking place. You say you are seeing a room around you, but that is not my verifiable experience. I do not know that you are seeing even if you are consciousness as am I.

But how do you verify qualia is experienced by anyone but your finite self? See the finite self appears IN consciousness and IS consciousness. But this is also the case in a dream. The characters we interact with despite being consciousness, do not in dreams have their own point from which seeing occurs. They are merely apparition. I know the experience of seeing is happening but not that the experience of seeing your bedroom is happening if you're currently there. Why are others NOT just imagined as having experience like seeing, with my experience of qualia being the only one?

A suggestion for you if you make another video to aid skeptics. See Corpus Callosotomy patients (splitting the brain hemisphere). Each side of the brain continues on as its own person which can function differently from the other. Yet of course when they are attached as ours are, we find that there is only one I, not two. So if the same I is in both sides, and only separation is what prevents them from directly knowing each others contents... Then what is the difference between my brain and yours to where the I WOULDN'T be the same anymore? You may invite this line of questioning: Have the viewer close their eyes and focus on their field of awareness. Have them notice thoughts all appear inside of it... Challenge them to have any thought that does not appear perceived in this field of being. See if they can hear any sound which does not appear in this field of awareness. Now ask if they can find the split. See if they can find where the awareness of one hemisphere ends and the other begins... We know that the right brain controls the left side and the left brain the right side. Have them tough the fingertips of both hands together, and see if either is experienced by a different and distinct consciousness. Or is it the same one? If it is the same one, then why assume it is a different one in another mind simply because it is separated and limited as happens in Corpus Callosotomy patients where the two hemispheres are separated? Perhaps you or some others may find this of use.

That is direct experience without ANY assumption: I have never known anything outside of experience. I have never known anything but one mind. I have never experienced space or matter, ONLY perceptions. I have never experienced being unconscious. I have never experienced not existing. I have never experienced any moment but the present - memories are recalled in the present which is the moment I am always in. If I perceive something it is real because there is only perception. ... How far can that take you to just outright 100% accuracy? It sounds solipsistic but of course the idea of "other people" is based on rational thought of physical space which is a rationalization of perceptions. You do not experience others as "over there" or separate when in pure being as they appear. You can argue your ego self did not exist at some point but it seems "mind has never not existed" is still a correct conclusion.

I think there is a natural inclination to, first of all, feel a sense of isolation when realizing your friends and family are you. That I am right now basically just talking to myself. And secondly, something that bothers me when dissected, is that I AM literally experiencing horrors like being massacred by cartels. And because of the nature of infinite potential, as well as the eternity of now, these experiences are permanent and there is no way out of this. From the perspective you take you may say pain or whatever is not real, but the people being massacred are mostly NOT enlightened beings and therefore do experience horrifying levels of pain and fear and suffering. Extending into the animal world. And that is the same exact backdrop "I", which in itself does not feel, but you get what I mean.

When I want to figure something out I become obsessed. As a result my exploration of nonduality has seeped into dreams. I had quite a curious experience where in the dream I was considering, as though it was waking life (I was not lucid), that the world around me might be my own mind. But I could not make myself fully get or believe it as I thought I was awake. Then I woke up in bed for real, and realized it in fact was all my own mind.

I would say that, for example, I do not feel a lack of loneliness by the fact the two hemispheres of my brain can be divided and are two selves. The difference between that, and myself and another human, is none at all. You are connected to yourself. Different parts of yourself. There's nobody sharing this reality with you. Just aspects of yourself. I have seen others put it the way you did, though... And by permanence what I mean is... Considering time does not exist literally, every moment exists eternally in the now. So the most intense pain a person has ever felt, is forever imprinted into the Now and is as such permanent and always happening. There is a slight issue if you run into existential crisis: You want support but you realize everyone is just you, so there is no other person who can come to your rescue. It renders it obsolete. I had a slight crisis earlier during a wave of intense realization which I have had twice sober now. I managed to indulge in a Netflix documentary and feel okay again... I don't have mental illnesses like bipolar etc. so crises of this nature are not normal for me. From my reading, I have learned that for many monks this is natural on the path. I suppose the good thing about Maya is that we can simply choose to get lost in it like a movie.

The unmanifest and the manifest... If you take a piece of paper and draw on the paper what you believe is out there independent of mind, you will find yourself drawing icons. In other words you are drawing perceptions. To say that any perception like sight is accurate to what is out there is to remove seeing from seen. Which cannot be done. There is ONLY infinity and perception. The world we call home is merely a dream. Brains are made of what we call matter, so are eyes. Brains and eyes are part of the dream, fundamentally they are icons, we might draw a brain or eye but you see they cannot really be out there in the way we draw them for seeing is part of seen. The brain and eyes are essentially nothing, as is absolutely everything. There is only experience. If you nuke the brain you do not destroy what you would call "out there", you simply erase an experience. If you imagine ANOTHER human's brain it is easier. When they die, the world does not vanish. This is of course obvious. But that is what I mean, see, the dream goes nowhere. The dreamer is emptiness... Nothingness... You cannot destroy nothingness because it is nothingness. There is nothing to destroy. Something is merely a manifestation of nothing. Everything happens within that emptiness. That is why there is nothing external, because all somethings are fundamentally one. Everything is "imagined" from nothing.

@Someone here If you suffered from derealization I'd suggest you ought to stay far away from these things.

I feel a sense of love more when imagining God's awareness as separate and in a dual framework, even if it's not true. Like, my head being filled with awareness made of and by God, feels like a divine kiss on the forehead. On this topic that I posted originally, there is an automatic refutation of how a physicalist would react, because they too propose a magical conjuring trick AKA "emergence". All nonduality is doing is saying that brains are part OF this magical "emergence" thing. There is nothing at all but unmanifest infinite potentiality, and manifest perception. All manifest is one, all unmanifest exists in nothing, and both added together = reality = the Tao = absolute Oneness.

I think evolution has kitted our brains out to HIDE reality, not to show it. This makes sense. The reality is, in even the most materialist paradigm everything is part of the universe. For a creature this view would make survival harder or even impossible so it must be hidden. It must be hidden so the creature identifies self and other and cares for only its own survival. Everything being consciousness (à la Brahman, etc) is an idea that would diminish a creature's urgency to survive, so the idea must be hidden. When people smoke DMT or whatever, they have wild hallucinations. But consider for a moment, there are almost infinite things you could hallucinate. You could hallucinate you're buying groceries at the supermarket. But no, there's always an underlying "here's the secrets of reality" tone. It's very weirdly specific that it hones in on that... Then you Google it and discover the "space clown" just endowed you with the entirety of the Upinashads. Like wtf? I think these drugs are simply undoing the lies our brain perpetuates to ensure survival. The truth is already there. Our brains KNOW the truth. It's just hiding it because hiding truth and displaying only what is beneficial for survival is evolutionarily advantageous. When the brain's default way of being (deceitful) is disrupted by drugs, the truth is so glaringly obvious as to be comical. Psychedelics are switching off our brain and reverting us to a state stumbled upon by mystics and saints. SOBER life is the hallucination. That is the deceit. A huge complex web of deceit that tries to ensure survival and replication over accuracy. If seeing colors as sounds was evolutionarily beneficial, that's how we would experience color. The brain does not care about showing you what is real.

What's really creepy to think about, is if infinite realities are happening all overlayed here, with the sheer dividing line being nothing more than perception (e.g. if we perceive the world of the big bang and cosmos then we evolve and adapt and sense that world), then by perceiving something different we are perhaps legitimately seeing another existent reality? So it's not the big bang cosmos reality perceived anymore it's something new. E.g. when we smoke the fuck out of some DMT, it alters our perceptions, and if what is real to us IS perceptions, then it is literally placing us into another very real and existing reality that is as real as this one... Though the brain would still be that "imagined" thing allowing for this exploration since the entire experience is allowed for BY the altered perceptions induced by a drug existent in this perceived sub-reality. Hm.............

I can't get this. I mean, I could just say all that exists is me, etc, but I want to connect all the dots in between to see the interplay etc. The impossibility of an external world is actually more difficult to understand. When I thought the world was really there it was easy to envision matter is a manifestation of Brahman and actually exists out there in a world. I realize now that this is impossible. And that is confusing. Everything fit perfectly before tied up with a nice little bow. ...I cannot say that there is not the appearance of a world happening. The APPEARANCE of a world in which smoking some funky toad secretion crosses the blood brain barrier and alters the content of consciousness for the localization I label as me, the appearance of such a world is certainly happening. It is evident that the ego is a creation of the brain to ensure survival and replication. When there was a real external world, this was very easy to put together. I understand that what is out there does not BECOME something when it is perceived, it is still NOTHING out there. And it was nothing before. The rocks and such smashing into each other is one of the infinite possible manifestations which exist in this singularity. And our perceptions are showing "this" sub-reality where a big bang happened then space and time and rocks and etc. It all exists right now in the same place. All universes. Perceptions alter which reality we perceive?????? But anyway... With all this said, survival of the fittest is adaptation to survive in WHAT exactly? Since there IS nothing to adapt to? Is it that the perceptions place us into a reality where objects and matter are, from this perspective very much real? We're adapting to matter "out there" even though there is no "out there"? An absolute, top to bottom totality of explanation for all of reality is important to me. Just the realization that I am all that exists and that you are me, I am you, "I am Leo" etc may satisfy some emotional or life improvement side of me but until I can explain it all in absolute totality with all the links and intricacies, I will need more...... I do not need more to believe it is right, but to satisfy a deep seated desire for knowledge and understanding.