Jacobsrw

Member
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    884

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Jacobsrw

  1. Posted · Edited by Jacobsrw

    20 minutes ago, Someone here said:

    Where is this "outside of my mind"?.  I mean I can see what's outside of my body. But what if the body and what's outside of it are contained inside my mind just like in a dream? 

    You are still assuming a mind prior to the awareness that created it. Fundamentally, there is no mind. To solemnly belief there is, is to grant the solipsistic paradigm, which is just pure illusion equivalent to each precipitating thought.

    Go to your direct experience and ask these questions. Continuing to interrogate this inquiry through conceptualising is of little good. It’s just using thinking to validate more thinking.

  2. Posted · Edited by Jacobsrw

    3 hours ago, The observer said:

    Sigh...

    You are in fact pointing to your own delusions. I am not interested in that. My statements don't have secret meanings/messages. That's all simply your delusion. You are being oversensitive, and reading too much between the lines that you literally create something out of nothing. That's not my problem. I cannot control how you interpret what I say. A man may say "I love you" to his wife, and she might perceive it as being cheated on. It's clearly not the man's problem.

    Now, please get offended by the example. Seriously, go on. Assume that I am undermining your masculinity, that I am going to sleep with you at night, and that everything I said up to this point was merely to get into your pants. LMAO.

    Hahaha you’re aren’t very good at taking your own advice  xD

    One attempts to hint an important pointer you then attack them while naively assuming you know already what they have pointed to, interesting display of hypocrisy there. Consider adopting more humbleness.

    Clearly you have much to improvement in regards to producing in productive discussion. You are yet to realise the one you are have been critiquing the the entire time is in fact yourself (full circle). I recommend you integrate the work, it is clear you are stuck in conceptualsation from what has been displayed in your rhetoric here.

    I wish you well moving forward.

  5. Posted · Edited by Jacobsrw

    @nistake In essence, I agree with this. Ones state of being should stem from this understanding but equally reflect in action so as to create powerful change in presence.

    Problems do not exist. All there is are simply matters of survival. Whether something either impinges upon it or supports it, that’s the only criterion. And even this is but pure bias and subjectivity.

    The only trap one must be careful of, is to not rationalise the primacy of Now as a justification to behave mindlessly. The Now has a crucial responsibility to it. Far greater than most spiritual circles give it credit. The Now is not a happy place of escape nor a sad place of demise.

    It is the fundamental place from which all places are hallucinated.

  6. Posted · Edited by Jacobsrw

    21 minutes ago, The observer said:

    I don't exist. Everything I say is a pointer and it is impersonal. How's that elitist? And I will state my truth regardless of how you feel about me.

    Agreed. That still doesn't explain away ones actions as an ego. How? The statements you make assume that those who disagree with you are inferior, but really that’s just an approximated assumption you’ve come to.

    21 minutes ago, The observer said:

    Plus, a gentle touch is not always effective. Sometimes, a slap in the face of the ego can wake it up. No one knows what exactly will make it click. We're all simply giving it our best shots.

    True. But if you are one who understands this work, you will also understand that antagonising ego’s imparts devilry. One is best to respond suited to those who they are speaking to not their own bias.

    Anywho, I can’t inform you otherwise. It’s up to you to asses the implications in your communication.

    Ps. Props to you if English is not your first language, you’ve done well.

  7. Posted · Edited by Jacobsrw

    @The observer haha that statement is absurd. Also, I don’t feel that you are aware of it. Your statements if anything, appear suggestive of an elitism ideal. I could be wrong though. My question is, why engage in personal criticism when this discussion is about something that beyond it?

    Then again little of what I have said in our conversations has been properly represented or interpreted so I’ll leave it there haha.

  8. Posted · Edited by Jacobsrw

    3 hours ago, The observer said:

    "Paradigm" is a pointer too. I told you earlier that you're still identified with the mind and aren't yet able to see beyond pointers, so I won't go into that again.

    And I still stand by what I have said. Awareness/direct experience is an ideology unless it is recognised as a pointer.

    You seem make a lot of fallacious assumptions.

    And I feel that you seriously misunderstand what an ideology is. I feel your need to reconsider the points you continue to contribute. They appear to generate more fallacies than those you accuse others of making.

    Please take the time to read each comment you contribute. You blatantly accuse others of the very thing you are demonstrating. 

    Before blindly attacking me as you previously have, seriously read them.

     

  9. Posted · Edited by Jacobsrw

    Find something you have passion for. Find a new way to approach it, put your unique spin on it and inspire the world. 

    Working hard is cliche. Don’t frame it as working hard. Frame it as fulfilling an immense opportunity to which no one else has done before you. 

    Be experimental and have fun. Commitment and effort is key but don’t fixate on work ethic, fixate on purpose. Work ethic becomes a culminating result of this.

  12. Posted · Edited by Jacobsrw

    3 hours ago, Someone here said:

    @Jacobsrw I will try to put it in a different way. All that exists  right now in this field of awareness is this body that I conveniently call "me" and the stuff around me and... nothing else.

    "You"for example is just this profile image that's appearing inside this field of awareness. That's literally what "you " are at this moment of awareness.  How can I know whether there is an actual person behind that? . It's sort of like when you are dreaming other people appear as if they are real and independent from your awareness but when you wake up you discover they were just an extension of your mind. Is it the Same with "real life"? 

    You pretty much derived your own answer.

    Yes that’s right. Fundamentally, you don’t know that I exist beyond the thought that I do. There’s is no me. I am literally a thought in your mind. See this right now in your experience. Eradicate the thought and I no longer exist. For an “other” to exist, you must maintain a mental image and the idea of them.

    This is the ineffable power of awareness. You can’t escape awareness and you require it for everything you know. All you perceive is a product of awareness. Nothing but a mere derivance from it. 
     

    @The observer direct experience is not a paradigm it’s a pointer. How one interprets something is what qualifies an ideology (anything can potentially be one). Your contention is like saying “awareness” is an ideology. Ideology is the clinging to concept rather than knowing the space that precipitated it, ie. awareness.

    “Direct experience” is a word to describe the presence of awareness. You’re are trying to ideologise words here by playing elitist, and creating confusion for the person who initially asked a genuine question.

     

  14. Posted · Edited by Jacobsrw

    @Member I’ve already stated this. Direct experience. After observing my direct experience extensively, it is clear that “I” is secondary. “I” is fundamentally predicated on a thought. Thought then identifies with the body. No thought = no “I”. Awareness is prior to thoughts. Your existence is awareness. This isn’t philosophy, it’s direct experience.

    @Someone here your misunderstanding awareness. Awareness is everyone and everyone is awareness. Awareness is a single field of existence which creates the illusion of self and other. Solipsism is a mental concept. No more significant than your thought about yesterday. It’s reliant on awareness to even exist. 
     

  15. Posted · Edited by Jacobsrw

    @Member why make fallacious assumptions?

    Awareness is known via direct experience. In fact, you may find this hard to believe but from a very young age I intuited an impenetrable, imperturbable, ever-present essence central to my existence. It wasn’t until later on in life I could contextualise it from more deeply contemplating it. 

    Facts and people are figments of imagination. If you cannot see this you are stuck in duality. One can verify the primacy of awareness in the direct experience as of now.

  17. Posted · Edited by Jacobsrw

    You can’t disprove solipsism because it was never real to begin with.

    Go to your direct experience. Observe it and you will see that the field of awareness is prior to the “I” that knows it. Solipsism presupposes an “I” prior to awareness and all that it sees. This is impossible as one does not know them self before awareness, they first require awareness to know them self. Thus, solipsism is an illusory secondary idea created by the “I” not the awareness prior to it.

    Pure awareness has no one ownership. It is unownable yet knowable to all that realise it. 
     

     

  18. Posted

    @Someone here you just answered your own question.

    Pure potential most be nothing and everything at the same time. To be one thing limits it from being another so to be pure infinitude the screen must impart all possibilities without preference to either one. That is why the screen is an efficient metaphor.

    Awareness must be all as all relies upon it but it must also be none as none fully represent it.

  19. Posted

    @Someone here Think about your question. If the movie requires a screen from which to be displayed, what do you think is more fundamental?

    The movie is nothing but a product of the screen. In fact, the movie is  completely made up of the screen. Without the screen the movie could not exist.

    Just as is for us with consciousness. Without conscious we could not exist, the screen of our experience is but completely made up of consciousness.

  22. Posted · Edited by Jacobsrw

    @Godhead In my opinion Peter Ralston takes the cake along with the likes of Rupert Spira. They speak about mind and ego more eloquently than any other modern day writers.

    I urge you to use your own insights as well. To write through powerful acts of truth one must have first hand realisations. Start doing deep inner contemplation and self inquiry. This will maximise the quality and depth of your writing.

    I for one have a book in the works regarding the inner dynamics of mind and human experience. Self realised insights have been the fundamental key for me. No truth is deeper than the direct truth itself.

    Also big tip: use elaborate imaginative analogies and metaphors, this helps with poeticness.

  23. Posted · Edited by Jacobsrw

    “To move beyond a problem we must first move beyond our unceasing need to entertain them”

    @Preety_India you must do the very thing that you fear, develop your social skills.

    Its truly powerful when you begin doing the very thing you feel to be insufficient. Because usually the feeling of lack is simply limited by an overarching belief. This disintegrates once you begin transcending it.

    Since almost all career aspects rely upon some level of social skills, I would see it imperative to work at it. You could of course be more of an online service consultant but then you really lose the true rawness of connectivity.

    Besides, getting out to develop your social proficiency will not only assist you with others but it will maximise your self understanding and self love.

    I for one have found indispensable growth by developing my social skills. I’ve gone from being one of extreme conservativeness, to one who can easily swing between outgoingness and conservativeness whenever required. I now love them both.

    Allow yourself the opportunity to as well.