Nonipsism

[Dodo]

You've all heard of solipsism and many in forum actively defend solipsism as truth. Why solo? We might be on the same boat that there is only 1 consciousness (even if there are many minds).

But it is 1 consciousness, because it is literally Emptiness, or Nothingness, or 0, so you cant really talk about it beginning, ending, or dividing it.

So the correct term then should not be Solipsism if you believe in that 1 consciousness,  it makes much more sense to call it Nonipsism. Not one entity that dreams it all, which is what the word Solipsism implies.

Consciousness is literally no one, we can't talk about Solipsism, if there is no Solo. Solipsism is the ego running away with truth, in my personal point of view.

 

 

Edited April 23 by Dodo

[CoolDreamThanks]

Consciousness isn't nothingness or 0. It is existence, Love, and awareness. It is complete and whole. It is indivisible Oneness. 

This dream, an illusion of multiplicity, is the opposite of that Oneness. 
 

[Javfly33]

Correct, i share this view.

When sense of self is gone, there is not a possibility of being alone, because the self constructed everything, including world, others, reality, time, etc.

Enlightment is complete death, which is why most of us are never enlightened, Only "states" of consciousness or "enlightment experiences". After a while Sort of sense of self has to build in order to keep playing illusion, if not physical body can not be hold for long time.

So we are moving there, i think. Every one of us is a limb of the Nothingness Consciousness, little by little more awareness is being stablished. The goal is the dream one day Will come to an end. Whole world came from nothing and Will go back to nothing.

But...the gift (or curse?) Of apparent individual experience comes from a freedom of choice of when you want to exercise that freedom Yourself. Every being goes at is own pace... altough the beings are imaginary yes, there is Only the Nothing. 

[Razard86]

Solpsism doesn't have to be defended. It has always been your experience. You have only ever had your experience in your entire life.

Other has always been held in your experience. If you disappear there is no other. What's even worse is other is dependent on you to exist but you are not dependent on other to exist.

And this is true always. It has never been different. To say other exists without you has never been your experience so you have to deny your own experience which is the definition of delusion.

 

 

[CoolDreamThanks]

4 minutes ago, Razard86 said:

Solpsism doesn't have to be defended. It has always been your experience. You have only ever had your experience in your entire life.

Other has always been held in your experience. If you disappear there is no other. What's even worse is other is dependent on you to exist but you are not dependent on other to exist.

And this is true always. It has never been different. To say other exists without you has never been your experience so you have to deny your own experience which is the definition of delusion.

 

 

Wow. Amen.

[Dodo]

You are always coming in very strong. YOU REALLY THINK YOU KNOW!!

2 hours ago, Razard86 said:

Solpsism doesn't have to be defended.

Solipsism definitely does need your defence. 

 

Quote

It has always been your experience. You have only ever had your experience in your entire life.

You are assuming that I have the same experience as you, hence you derive that I have only ever had My experience my entire life. It's  because of what YOUR experience is telling you that you say this. A lie cannot hold itself up for long without being revealed !

You say I live in Solipsism, but to you I am only an appearance in your consciousness, remember?? How do you know my experience and why do you equate it to your own? And If you don't have your own solipsistic experience that is different from mine, then why are you even talking? If we both have two different Solipsistic experiences, then Solipsism is out of the window.

We can now both testify in court, that we had only ever experienced our own selves and others are always held in our experience. Solipsism over? 

Quote

Other has always been held in your experience. If you disappear there is no other. What's even worse is other is dependent on you to exist but you are not dependent on other to exist.

If I disappear then there is no other TO ME.
If I am not in the room while my girlfriend cheats on me, she is still cheating on me.
If maths proves the Earth is not flat, then the Earth is not flat even if my experience tells me otherwise. 

Eyewitness testimony is the lowest form of proof, you cannot trust your experience for Shit. 

 

Quote

And this is true always. It has never been different. To say other exists without you has never been your experience so you have to deny your own experience which is the definition of delusion.

I say brother, if your experience is delusional, then denying it is the best  and least delusional thing you can do. If you are deluded into Solipsism, deny it. You already don't believe in Solipsism, no really! , because you are arguing with one of the NPCs in your Solipsistic worldview, and say that that NPC is actually a Playable Character and that you are the NPC, but at the same time you are a Solipsist as well? What the actual! There is only ever 1 Solipsist! 

 

Pills too hard to swallow, you will need to use my new word. If you are a Nonipsist, all this will disappear. You no longer will feed that part of your ego that wants to be the most important thing in the Universe. 

Have some respect for those who came before you were born. Those who sacrificed for you. Just because you never experienced it yourself? You will deny the holocaust? What else are you capable of? 

Edited April 23 by Dodo

[Dodo]

 @Razard86

You are literally jumping from the sane conclusion that "you cant be sure of something if its outside of your conscious minds grasp", to the insane conclusion that "it definitely doesnt exist if its not in your conscious minds grasp."

I ASK YOU, How do you know they dont exist without you there, if you literally cant witness whether it exists or not?? You are assuming! Be fking honest for once, im not writing for you to keep singing the same tune. I am telling you things that are true beyond belief.

Snap out of it, the entire universe is beaming with Consciousness. Razard and Dodo are both ANTS.

Do you have to fill all questions with an answer? Sometimes you have to leave the questionmark there and not try to force your answer. Are you able to choose Mu, instead of Yes or No as the answer? You need to be able to do that when faced with a paradoxical question or something that can't be known for sure ever.

Edited April 23 by Dodo

[Razard86]

58 minutes ago, Dodo said:

 @Razard86

You are literally jumping from the sane conclusion that "you cant be sure of something if its outside of your conscious minds grasp", to the insane conclusion that "it definitely doesnt exist if its not in your conscious minds grasp."

I ASK YOU, How do you know they dont exist without you there, if you literally cant witness whether it exists or not?? You are assuming! Be fking honest for once, im not writing for you to keep singing the same tune. I am telling you things that are true beyond belief.

Snap out of it, the entire universe is beaming with Consciousness. Razard and Dodo are both ANTS.

Do you have to fill all questions with an answer? Sometimes you have to leave the questionmark there and not try to force your answer. Are you able to choose Mu, instead of Yes or No as the answer? You need to be able to do that when faced with a paradoxical question or something that can't be known for sure ever.

You do realize....that none of your examples prove anything. Can a blind man see? No. So for a blind man, a visual universe does not exist. That is what you are not understanding. All of your knowledge, is based on your senses. What exists...is what you can sense. If you can't sense it, it doesn't exist. How can you claim something exists, if you can't experience it?

The only reason humans can claim viruses exist, is because they have tools to sense them. Your entire argument is based and predicated on guessing. Not confirmation. If you cannot prove something exists, it doesn't exist until you prove it. YOU are your own proof. You have never proven something existed OUTSIDE OF YOU EVER.

And that is because you cannot. All you do is tell yourself they exist outside of you and then what happens? They appear within you as imagination. If I tell you your house burns down and you go to your house and it has not burned down and I keep telling you I know its true, you will point to your house and say I KNOW my house has not burned down I am looking at it!!.....Well guess what....I am wrong because I am denying WHAT IS, and creating my own version of WHAT IS in my mind. This means I am imagining it and creating it.

What your entire argument just now was, is I know something exists, even though I cannot confirm it. This means you believe that your house exists, without confirmation. So you prove, that you believe something is true even though you cannot confirm it, this means you are imagining it.

It's so simple, the question of can you confirm something exists if you cannot perceive it, the answer is NO. Because for something to exist you have to be able to perceive it. THIS MEANS, you are existence itself. Since you are existence itself, you determine if something exists. So the truth is you are scared to admit that your parents do not exist when you don't perceive them, so your solution is to imagine them in your mind and say they exist, and this is how you workaround the issue. But you cannot actually admit to yourself that you do this, because the consequences of admitting this is, your parents cannot exist if you don't perceive them...and thus this means they are figments of your imagination, no different than if you imagine they exist right now without confirmation.

[Vibes]

6 minutes ago, Razard86 said:

It's so simple, the question of can you confirm something exists if you cannot perceive it, the answer is NO. Because for something to exist you have to be able to perceive it. THIS MEANS, you are existence itself. Since you are existence itself, you determine if something exists. So the truth is you are scared to admit that your parents do not exist when you don't perceive them, so your solution is to imagine them in your mind and say they exist, and this is how you workaround the issue. But you cannot actually admit to yourself that you do this, because the consequences of admitting this is, your parents cannot exist if you don't perceive them...and thus this means they are figments of your imagination, no different than if you imagine they exist right now without confirmation.

@Razard86 I've admitted this many times, it's not always clear and there's always a drop of doubt mixed in. How to remove this drop from the mix?

Also, please answer directly based on what we talked about, am I getting it or am I totally lost?

To be really honest, it feels like my understanding is not complete but it's not totally clueless. But I want to hear a direct answer from YOU

[Razard86]

14 minutes ago, Vibes said:

@Razard86 I've admitted this many times, it's not always clear and there's always a drop of doubt mixed in. How to remove this drop from the mix?

Also, please answer directly based on what we talked about, am I getting it or am I totally lost?

To be really honest, it feels like my understanding is not complete but it's not totally clueless. But I want to hear a direct answer from YOU

The doubt comes from a fear of being alone. You need to study human nature, you learn human nature by studying yourself, other humans, and human history. All you have to do is be honest that you don't like this truth. But notice that is just some feeling. This has been true all along and it doesn't actually change anything. 

If you call your parents on the phone, they can still pick up and call you. If you video call them, they can still pick up and you can see them. You just know that they only exist within your experience because your experience is absolute.

The truth is not hard, it's very simple. Test it. Close your eyes. Imagine you walk away from your house. You know right now in that imagination your parents don't exist. You can then call them or video call them, and poof they exist. So you just proved to yourself using imagination that calling your parents or video calling them does not prove they actually exist separately. They only exist, when they are within your experience. So now you know the truth using that example.

All that happened is you were told that people existed separately from you and you took it on as a BELIEF, but it was never actually true and you just proved it. For you to prove something, it has to be IN YOUR EXPERIENCE which means provability is =to experience. You prove your parents exist by calling them, but you don't prove they exist separately from you, because they cannot. It is impossible for ANYTHING to exist separately from you. This means you are the SOURCE of all existence, which means......hmmmm maybe you are GOD???!!!! LOL.

It's right in front of you. You are the ABSOLUTE and the ABSOLUTE has no other. It's literally impossible to have an other. So you say but God....has no limits, so God can have an other, sure...if God just tells himself that I have an other....then it does. So you can delude yourself like DODO and just say you have an other regardless of all the proof, and thus you delude yourself into a reality of other, which you have already been living in. The moment you stop telling yourself they exist separately from you, then it all is seen and experienced as one. You are NEO, lol you are ONE.

Edited April 23 by Razard86

[Razard86]

What I love about the Absolute Solipsism question is.....it teaches why corruption exists, why misinformation exists, and why what you call evil exists within humanity in one fell swoop. Your inability to accept the truth even though everything points to it being true, is proof that a human chooses convenience/comfortableness over honesty and integrity. 

The struggle you have to accept oneness, is really just your inner struggle against evil. If you deny Absolute Solipsism you say even though I know everything is ONE, I choose a lie because a lie is more comfortable. I choose it because it is more convenient for me emotionally. I do not want to do inner work to unattach myself from the need of Other and take full responsibility for how I construct reality, instead I will keep other around so I can treat them however I want, and blame them for whatever I want.

The birth of evil, is the birth of other. It's why I am so fascinated with this topic because I get to see how evil works. God is very fascinating in how it shows that conditional love for truth creates corruption. It's an amazing thing to see really. 

[Dodo]

 

5 minutes ago, Razard86 said:

All that happened is You are NEO, lol you are ONE.

You got one part of that wrong. NEO is not one. Its in the name: Not Even One.

I AM one lap ahead of you, and to you it seems like delusion, from your limited rigid point of view as a SoLiPsISt. You see me running behind you, thinking you are ahead of me.

 

36 minutes ago, Razard86 said:

Your entire argument is based and predicated on guessing. Not confirmation. If you cannot prove something exists, it doesn't exist until you prove it. YOU are your own proof. You have never proven something existed OUTSIDE OF YOU EVER.

 

You did not understand anything I said. SMH feels bad man.

If you cannot prove something exists, that doesnt mean it doesn't exist. Thats your opinion. 

Its only in your untrained mind that you jump to that conclusion, because you want to keep the illusion of knowing everything. How convenient for your ego, instead of admitting that you dont know that which is beyond you, you say it doesnt exist and now you feel great!

oh dear...

 

 

39 minutes ago, Razard86 said:

 

What your entire argument just now was, is I know something exists, even though I cannot confirm it. This means you believe that your house exists, without confirmation. So you prove, that you believe something is true even though you cannot confirm it, this means you are imagining it.

Oh yeah, was that my argument, or your stick figure representation of my argument?? In your mind you believe im saying "i know it exists" ??

1 hour ago, Dodo said:

 @Razard86

You are literally jumping from the sane conclusion that "you cant be sure of something if its outside of your conscious minds grasp", to the insane conclusion that "it definitely doesnt exist if its not in your conscious minds grasp."

Do you have to fill all questions with an answer? Sometimes you have to leave the questionmark there and not try to force your answer. Are you able to choose Mu, instead of Yes or No as the answer? You need to be able to do that when faced with a paradoxical question or something that can't be known for sure ever.

Q: Is there anything outside of your perception right now.

Wrong answer A: definitely not

Wrong answer B: definitely yes

Correct answer: Mu (cannot be answered, we don't know the answer, we will never know the answer, its a mystery, your ego cant take that)

 

You are disrespectful, because you dont even attempt to understand what im saying.

 

[Dodo]

12 minutes ago, Razard86 said:

What I love about the Absolute Solipsism question is.....it teaches why corruption exists, why misinformation exists, and why what you call evil exists within humanity in one fell swoop. Your inability to accept the truth even though everything points to it being true, is proof that a human chooses convenience/comfortableness over honesty and integrity. 

The struggle you have to accept oneness, is really just your inner struggle against evil. If you deny Absolute Solipsism you say even though I know everything is ONE, I choose a lie because a lie is more comfortable. I choose it because it is more convenient for me emotionally. I do not want to do inner work to unattach myself from the need of Other and take full responsibility for how I construct reality, instead I will keep other around so I can treat them however I want, and blame them for whatever I want.

The birth of evil, is the birth of other. It's why I am so fascinated with this topic because I get to see how evil works. God is very fascinating in how it shows that conditional love for truth creates corruption. It's an amazing thing to see really. 

Literally the ramblings of a mad man. I try to help you but you are just a raging storm of bullshit. You need to want to help yourself. 

You are talking now that humanity, evil, corruption and misinformation exist after you told me something needs to be directly in your experience to exist. 

Please man do me a favor!

So my house doesn't exist if its not directly in my view, but suddenly evil, humanity and corruption exist? Give me a fkin break dude. You need to rethink all that by yourself while looking in the mirror. 

 

Edited April 23 by Dodo

[josemar]

11 minutes ago, Dodo said:

Literally the ramblings of a mad man. I try to help you but you are just a raging storm of bullshit. You need to want to help yourself. 

You are talking now that humanity, evil, corruption and misinformation exist after you told me something needs to be directly in your experience to exist. 

Please man do me a favor!

So my house doesn't exist if its not directly in my view, but suddenly evil, humanity and corruption exist? Give me a fkin break dude. You need to rethink all that by yourself while looking in the mirror. 

 

Same conclusion I reached about the rizzing lizard some time ago, sometimes he gives the impression of some spiritual sparks, but then drowns them in batshit crazy ramblings. I stopped engaging at that time, and I'm much better.

[Razard86]

3 hours ago, Dodo said:

 

You got one part of that wrong. NEO is not one. Its in the name: Not Even One.

I AM one lap ahead of you, and to you it seems like delusion, from your limited rigid point of view as a SoLiPsISt. You see me running behind you, thinking you are ahead of me.

 

You did not understand anything I said. SMH feels bad man.

If you cannot prove something exists, that doesnt mean it doesn't exist. Thats your opinion. 

Its only in your untrained mind that you jump to that conclusion, because you want to keep the illusion of knowing everything. How convenient for your ego, instead of admitting that you dont know that which is beyond you, you say it doesnt exist and now you feel great!

oh dear...

 

 

Oh yeah, was that my argument, or your stick figure representation of my argument?? In your mind you believe im saying "i know it exists" ??

Q: Is there anything outside of your perception right now.

Wrong answer A: definitely not

Wrong answer B: definitely yes

Correct answer: Mu (cannot be answered, we don't know the answer, we will never know the answer, its a mystery, your ego cant take that)

 

You are disrespectful, because you dont even attempt to understand what im saying.

 

The reason you can never know...is because it doesn't exist. Being and knowing are one. You can only know being. That's what you don't understand, because you are unaware of your being, because you don't know what being is. 

The only reason a mystery exists, is because God must separate knowing from being, so it can continue. God's nature is infinity because it LOVES, to be and THEN to know. The moment God knows all, it creates again to know some more. But eventually ALL is KNOWN. God= the end of all mystery. To say it cannot be known is to put a limitation on God. God alone is capable of knowing everything because it is ITSELF. God has perfect self-knowledge.

In fact, if what you don't understand is a mystery can only happen when God creates duality. When there is no duality, all is known. A mystery can only exist in time and space and God is beyond time and space.

[Razard86]

3 hours ago, Dodo said:

Literally the ramblings of a mad man. I try to help you but you are just a raging storm of bullshit. You need to want to help yourself. 

You are talking now that humanity, evil, corruption and misinformation exist after you told me something needs to be directly in your experience to exist. 

Please man do me a favor!

So my house doesn't exist if its not directly in my view, but suddenly evil, humanity and corruption exist? Give me a fkin break dude. You need to rethink all that by yourself while looking in the mirror. 

 

You don't understand because your mind is closed it obvious. I have spelled it out.

1. Can you confirm something outside of your experience? The answer is no.

2. Have you ever experienced anything outside of your experience? The answer is no.

At this point nothing else needs to be asked. Why? Because all thoughts and questions are held within your experience. If you were ever able to prove that your position was correct that proof could exist outside your experience, you could only prove it within your experience.

Once you realize this....all questions are answered. You literally need experience to have proof.

This means proof=experience. So if you refuse the proof of your experience then you are gaslighting yourself, you are engaging in cognitive dissonance and are not being honest. What do you think evil does? Evil denies experience and comes up with justifications for why its thoughts and beliefs are valid and these justifications have no integrity and thus cannot hold. They cannot hold because they are not part of what is happening, instead they are you using your powers of imagination to DENY your experience. So you use experience, to war against itself and to attempt to create a disagreement with experience. This is the birth of evil and corruption. But you MUST DENY you do this to continue your charade. 

Oh and your mystery argument doesn't work, because you need existence to have a mystery. A mystery has to be recognized as a mystery....otherwise it doesn't exist. So you still need existence to have a mystery.

Edited April 24 by Razard86

[Dodo]

5 hours ago, Razard86 said:

The reason you can never know...is because it doesn't exist.

The reason you can never know is because you can never witness it. "BeCaUsE iT dOeSnT eXisT" is your own  assumption and preference. 

You really write a lot, and I already explained much in detail in previous post.

Its 8am and i spent a lot of time writing to you yesterday, and seems in vein. So here is everything explained by an AI which shows exactly the narrow mindedness of your position here. And I am close minded. Sure....

Me:

If something is out of your direct experience, you cannot prove if its there or not right now. Guy says that means it doesn't exist. Anothrr guy says it does exist. Third guy says, we cant be sure whether it exists or not. 4th guy says it both exists and not in superposition. Which guy is right

ChatGPT:

Each person's perspective represents a different philosophical stance:

1. The first guy's perspective reflects a strict empiricist view that only accepts what can be directly observed or experienced as real. From this standpoint, if something is beyond direct experience, it's deemed nonexistent.

2. The second guy believes in the existence of things beyond direct experience, possibly based on faith, intuition, or belief systems. For him, existence transcends direct sensory perception.

3. The third guy holds an agnostic viewpoint, acknowledging the limitations of human knowledge and refraining from making definitive claims about the existence or nonexistence of things beyond direct experience.

4. The fourth guy's viewpoint seems to allude to quantum superposition, a concept from quantum mechanics where particles can exist in multiple states simultaneously until observed. However, applying this concept to existential questions might be more metaphorical or speculative.

There's no definitive "right" answer here; it depends on one's philosophical, spiritual, or scientific perspective. Each viewpoint has its own rationale and implications.

Me:

Ok but you said there is no definitive right answer and you claim this is a right answer. So the guy that already admitted he will never know the right answer, the agnostic, was the only one following truth?

ChatGPT:

It's true that the agnostic perspective acknowledges the inherent uncertainty in many existential questions, which can be seen as a form of intellectual honesty. However, labeling it as the "right" answer implies a value judgment that may not apply universally. Each viewpoint has its own validity and implications, and what may be considered "right" or appropriate can vary based on individual beliefs, values, and circumstances. So while the agnostic stance offers a humble recognition of uncertainty, it may not necessarily be deemed superior or "right" in every context.

 

See, chatGPT says it best. I cant spend more time arguing when you only see what you see and deny logic because you dont see it. 

 

I made sure to include that it is impartial when it says that the agnostic viewpoint is not necessarily the right one, but it admits that it is intellectually honest. While you fail to grasp my position and keep saying i am not honest about this that and the other. You need to grow up and give space to others. Yes, others, you are a noone. You are not The One. I AM NOT THE ONE. WE are both No One.

Edited April 24 by Dodo

[CoolDreamThanks]

@Dodo In other words, you think you know better than Ramana Maharshi, Jesus (in ACIM), Mooji, Lisa Cairns, Leo, Ramaji, Sri Nisragadata Maharaji, Buddhism in general, and one of the main teachers of Hinduism -- Adi Shankara? Buddhists call it anicca, Hindus call it maya, and Christians call it a dream.   

I don't recommend following others based on belief. Still, it might be wise to look at well-respected spiritual teachers and be open to the idea that if you disagree with all of them, then perhaps there is a possibility that you are mistaken. Just another POV to consider.

[Dodo]

1 minute ago, CoolDreamThanks said:

@Dodo In other words, you think you know better than Ramana Maharshi, Jesus (in ACIM), Mooji, Lisa Cairns, Leo, Ramaji, Sri Nisragadata Maharaji, Buddhism in general, and one of the main teachers of Hinduism -- Adi Shankara? Buddhists call it anicca, Hindus call it maya, and Christians call it a dream.   

I don't recommend following others based on belief. Still, it might be wise to look at well-respected spiritual teachers and be open to the idea that if you disagree with all of them, then perhaps there is a possibility that you are mistaken. Just another POV to consider.

Don't give me that. Disagree with Ramana? His main teaching was silence... Lol... Disagree with Jesus? His main teaching was love.

Everything these teachers said was a concession to the thinking mind. They gave you toys to play with to keep your attention while the presence works on you. 

Please dont give me that. You speak to me about Ramana Maharshi... lol you have no idea who I am.

[CoolDreamThanks]

12 minutes ago, Dodo said:

Please dont give me that. You speak to me about Ramana Maharshi... lol you have no idea who I am.

 Ramana is looking down on you frowning. All good though, no harm - no foul. Only a piece of the illusion appearing confused.