Carl-Richard

You don't have to be a saint even though your parents expected you to be. It's OK.

But the light shines on everything does it not? Now this is just messing around.

Where does frustration rank on the pole of consciousness?

Wrong. It's that solipsism doesn't describe the world, only the dreamer. You're very sloppy in your scholarship of those you decide to name-drop for bolstering your personal beliefs. I suggest stopping that. Nevertheless, I'm just making it clear for anyone here who cares about what Ramana thinks about solipsism: this is not a thread about Ramana Maharshi. It's a thread about a guy's obsession about using a term to describe relationships in the world.

I read like a few post in this thread and two of them had circular definitions. Something to be conscious of.

Anybody care to explain what the interpreter of Ramana means by "not solipsism turned out on the world but solipsism turned in on yourself"?

Sort of. The Default Mode Network instinctively throws out long-term memories about oneself (self-referential processing). When you're more conscious, thinking about yourself drops.

Lesser activation of the Default Mode Network.

What's the point?

Yes. Is ain't ought.

Just distinguish between personal dissociative complexes ("minds") and boundless consciousness. It's so easy.

They seek deactivation of the Default Mode Network in their own limited ways.

They seek deactivation of the Default Mode Network in their own limited ways, the ways they were brought up to do, conditioned, what they believe is the best thing to do, but if they were given a taste of what spirituality does, they might capitulate to it completely or fear it for its intensity and for threatening their sense of limited identity and stability. It's a constant tug-of-war between what is desired the most (expansion) and what is feared of being lost (contraction). The common man is lost in the middle, being ruled by both, not capitulating to pure expansion. That's the truth of suffering, attachment, dukkha, samsara, being reborn as a fearing ego moment to moment. But it's not just the common man. It's every spiritual seeker up until the moment of letting go of everything they fear, and even everything they desire, but pure desire.

Now you're making the mistake of solipsism turned out on the world instead of turned in towards yourself, as Michael James put it (the person doing the Ramana Maharshi Q&A). Once you use solipsism to describe relationships out in the world, relationships between people, between you as a dream character and other dream characters, you are no longer talking about Ramana's solipsism. Ramana's solipsism is the one dreamer taking on the dream character(s) as an illusion in its own imagination. The relationship between the dreamer and the dream characters is not spatial, not local, not present in time, only present through omniscience, pure knowing, pure being of everything that exists. Once you start talking about hidden things, of things being present in space or being not present in space, of where things are on the screen of perception or where they are not — once you start to question the dreamer's complete omniscience — you are in conceptual thinking, belief, fantastical delusion. What Ramana wanted to tell you is that your grandma is an illusion, and so are you.

@Entrepreneur What if we could predict what everybody values the most based on an inverse activation of the Default Mode Network, and that the end goal of spiritual practice is the pinnacle of that?

And you?

Yup. MMO analogies are the way to teach zoomers. Tom Campbell was 20 years early.

Denying other, denying multiplicity, denying maya, is cool and all, but as Ramana Maharshi would have said, deny it all the way. Yourself as a person in the dream, that is also maya. If it's possible for you as a person in the dream to exist, it's possible for others in the dream to exist.

Death of the self means you're literally dying every single moment of your existence.

Solipsism is not heavy. Death of the self is heavy.

The person you think yourself to be in the dream: the personal. The dreamer: transpersonal.

The distinction between personal and transpersonal is more illusive than the distinction between spiritual ego and spirituality for some.

Dictatee.

Yes. Yes.

What do you lay in the word "self-transcendence"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_Z