Salvijus

The quickest way to find the most mistaken one is to look for someone with a smirk of conceit.

And every mystic that ever lived*

Yes, just include yourself into this aswell.

And I have no problems with that. There's no contradiction between a boundless experience and an infinite number of perspectives of that one boundless experience.

You mean your 5 senses? No, conciousness far more infinite than what your 5 senses are able to capture. Your 5 senses are just a small keyhole to infinity. There are infinite keyholes.

It also individuates itself infinitely to grasp itself.

Or just debate you. A debate that you would lose.

Because a boundless experience does not rule out multiple points of view.

Infinity can recognize itself from infinite points of view.

A pov is not a bubble. Hence there is infinite room for infinite points of view to exist.

Nothing can stop God from experiencing itself from infinite points of views. He needs at least one to recognize itself. If he's capable of one, he's capable of infinite also. And experiencing something from infinite points of view gives you a much grander experience than just a single puny pov. As if God was so impotent.

Excellent and revealing question. ❗️Short Answer: No major mystic or spiritual tradition endorses solipsism. In fact, nearly all mystical traditions explicitly reject it, even while affirming the unity of all things. 🧭 Why? Let’s break it down: ✅ Mysticism affirms unity, not isolation Mystics across traditions commonly say: "All is one." Not: "Only I am." The "One" is not the personal ego—it is universal consciousness, God, the Tao, the Absolute, or Brahman. 🧘‍♂️ Traditions That Emphasize Oneness (but not solipsism) 🕉️ Advaita Vedanta (Hinduism) Says: The self (Atman) is Brahman (the Absolute). But: The realization is not "I (ego) am all," but that the sense of separate selves dissolves into non-dual awareness. Key Point: Others are not illusions in your mind—they are Brahman too. ☸️ Buddhism Emphasizes no-self (anatta) and interdependence (pratītya-samutpāda). The self is not ultimately real, but neither is the claim that “only my mind exists.” Enlightenment includes compassion for other beings—impossible under solipsism. ✡️ Kabbalah (Jewish Mysticism) All beings are emanations of the Divine (Ein Sof), distinct but interconnected. The mystical goal is unity with the Source, not denial of others' reality. ✝️ Christian Mysticism God dwells in all things; the self is nothing without God. Love of others is central—otherness is real, even in mystical union. ☯️ Taoism The Tao flows through all things; differentiation is functional but rooted in unity. No sense that “only I exist”—rather, everything is part of a dynamic whole. 🌍 Sufism (Islamic Mysticism) The aim is fana (dissolution of the ego) into al-Haqq (the Real). All selves are rays of God, not projections of one person’s dream. ❌ Why solipsism is excluded It centers the ego, even if unconsciously. It denies love, compassion, and service—which all mystic traditions affirm. It collapses spiritual practice into self-referential fantasy. It confuses metaphysical unity with psychological isolation. 🧠 So why do some modern seekers accidentally fall into solipsism? Nonduality and self-inquiry can be misinterpreted as: “If I’m the Self, then only I am real.” But that’s the ego hijacking the insight. True nonduality says: “I am not this ego—and neither is anyone else. We are all That.” ✅ Final Insight: Mysticism dissolves the ego—not the world. Solipsism inflates the ego and denies others. Therefore, no genuine mystic tradition is solipsistic—and if one were, it would contradict the very heart of spiritual realization. Would you like to explore where people most often misinterpret mysticism as solipsism, especially in modern nonduality circles?

Every point of view is experiencing the same infinity.

Double check with chatgpt. There's not a single spiritual tradition that believes in solipsism.

The conclusions you make based on observations are not the most reasonable ones tho.

Eexperience is infinite, I already answered that.

I know that conciousness has to individuate itself at least once to recognize itself. So if it could do it once, I have no reason to assume it can't do it an infinite amount of times aswell. The second option sounds much more of what God would do. One puny experience is too small for God with infinite potential.

You can have multiple points of view of the same experience. God is having an experience through you and through me, and through infinite other points of view.

No, one unbounded experience experienced from infinite points of view all at the same time, in the eternal here and now.

Yes but that doesn't disprove my point 👍 nice try tho

By definition there is no room for anything else. But there is infinite room for points of self recognition. You're just one of those points. There is nothing stopping conciousness from creating infinite more like you.

Yes. But that doesn't imply that there is only sole recognizer of experience. There could be infinite individuated points in conciousness where unbounded experience is being recognized. If conciousness was able to do it once, what is stopping it from doing it infinite amount of times?

Yes

From a certain point of view I can agree with this.

If what is can recognize itself once by individuating itself into you, then it can recognize itself infinite amount of times by individuating itself into infinite entities. And that's what is happening right now. Why? Because God is all about glory, and infinite recognition is much more glorious than a single puny recognition that is manifesting through you alone. It's incredible arrogance to believe your puny experience of life is the limit of God's greatness.