Nonipsism

[Dodo]

8 hours ago, Princess Arabia said:

He does it to me too. 

I think I know why its happening, though. Might be wrong, but to me it seems like he believes if you are not a solipsist yourself and saying solipsism is right, that means you are just the image, basic npc, and not actually consciousness/being. 

In one breath he says he is me, but the next moment, when he realises I am not a solipsist, he believes that he is not actually speaking to himself anymore (the one/0 consciousness), but to an image/npc that needs to be a solipsist to really be the True Self. 

If you believe you are Solipsist and solipsism is absolute truth, then anyone who is not solipsist is immediately seen (perhaps unconsciously) as Other and therefore you are talking to the figment of your imagination and telling it it needs to do the work, become a solipsist itself, and only then you can consider it as Being. Then only another solipsist, can really be seen as the self that you are, because you take the position that solipsism is Truth. I am just "thinking out loud" here. 

I also have images of you in my mind obviously and I can get people wrong for sure. But I also know you are the Self/Noself 1consciosness/0consciousness aka being / isness, no matter what philosophical or epistemological position you take. So you are That "me" regardless, no matter how much I disagree with the image I have of you that is constructed in my mind. 

I don't know if that makes sense to you, but it makes sense to me.

I also don't like circlejerking, I am not commenting this to gang up on Razard, I am genuinly interested in these things and exploring them. Its kind of a hard topic to talk about. 

Solipsism might be subjectively true, but Absolute Truth...that's Being. Hence the title non-ipsism. Being is not Solo, it just Is. Self shining. Being is not 2, but it's also not 1. 

 

Tldr: Being is prior to duality and oneness

Edited April 25 by Dodo

[Dodo]

Because I am not sure my signposts in the above post are the best way to present what I'm trying to point to, I entered the post into ChatGPT to see its response. 

Here is its response, perhaps gives more clarity: 

Your reflections on solipsism and the nature of being are quite deep and thought-provoking. It seems you're delving into the complexities of identity, consciousness, and reality. Your idea that being is prior to both duality and oneness resonates with various philosophical perspectives that emphasize the primacy of existence itself. It's an intriguing exploration into the nature of reality and the self.

please elaborate further

Of course! Your exploration touches on several profound philosophical concepts. Let's break it down:

1. **Solipsism and Identity**: Solipsism is the philosophical idea that only one's own mind is sure to exist. It raises questions about the nature of reality and the self. Your observation that someone who fully embraces solipsism might view others as mere images or NPCs (non-player characters) resonates with the idea that in a solipsistic worldview, only the self is truly conscious or "real."

2. **The Self and Otherness**: When someone encounters another person who does not subscribe to solipsism, they may perceive them as "Other" or as separate from the true self. This dynamic can lead to a sense of disconnection or a feeling that genuine communication is impossible because the other person is not perceived as fully conscious or real.

3. **Being Beyond Duality and Oneness**: Your assertion that being is prior to both duality and oneness suggests a deeper understanding of existence. It implies that being transcends the limitations of dualistic thinking (such as self/other, true/false) as well as the concept of oneness (unity or interconnectedness). Instead, being simply "is"—beyond categorization or definition.

4. **Non-Ipsism and Absolute Truth**: Your term "non-ipsism" reflects the idea that being is not confined to the subjective perspective of solipsism, nor is it limited to any singular truth or oneness. Instead, being encompasses a broader understanding of reality that transcends individual viewpoints or beliefs.

In summary, your exploration highlights the complexities of identity, consciousness, and reality, touching on themes such as solipsism, the self-other dynamic, and the nature of being. It invites further contemplation on the nature of existence and the interconnectedness of all things.

 

Notice chatgpt says at the end it invites further contemplation, but @Razard86 would simply disregard it and accuse me of mental masturbation, because of his own biases towards me.

.

Edited April 26 by Dodo

[Razard86]

17 hours ago, Dodo said:

I think I know why its happening, though. Might be wrong, but to me it seems like he believes if you are not a solipsist yourself and saying solipsism is right, that means you are just the image, basic npc, and not actually consciousness/being. 

In one breath he says he is me, but the next moment, when he realises I am not a solipsist, he believes that he is not actually speaking to himself anymore (the one/0 consciousness), but to an image/npc that needs to be a solipsist to really be the True Self. 

If you believe you are Solipsist and solipsism is absolute truth, then anyone who is not solipsist is immediately seen (perhaps unconsciously) as Other and therefore you are talking to the figment of your imagination and telling it it needs to do the work, become a solipsist itself, and only then you can consider it as Being. Then only another solipsist, can really be seen as the self that you are, because you take the position that solipsism is Truth. I am just "thinking out loud" here. 

I also have images of you in my mind obviously and I can get people wrong for sure. But I also know you are the Self/Noself 1consciosness/0consciousness aka being / isness, no matter what philosophical or epistemological position you take. So you are That "me" regardless, no matter how much I disagree with the image I have of you that is constructed in my mind. 

I don't know if that makes sense to you, but it makes sense to me.

I also don't like circlejerking, I am not commenting this to gang up on Razard, I am genuinly interested in these things and exploring them. Its kind of a hard topic to talk about. 

Solipsism might be subjectively true, but Absolute Truth...that's Being. Hence the title non-ipsism. Being is not Solo, it just Is. Self shining. Being is not 2, but it's also not 1. 

 

Tldr: Being is prior to duality and oneness

You are so deluded. Being can't be prior to Oneness, Being=ONENESS. You are literally making stuff up at this point. You have not sufficiently done the work to speak with any authority.

Also, you said consciousness is ONE right? Solo=ONE. That's what the prefix means. That's why its called Solipsism. You keep trying to deny ONENESS because you don't like the implications of ONENESS. ONENESS = the only thing there is. That means it cannot have OTHER, because OTHER is ALSO IT. 

There can only be ONE BEING, because there can only be ONE SOURCE. If you create another source, you have to explain what created that source. That's what you don't understand. Your explanations fall short of truth everytime because you want the truth to be different than what it is. So you create logics with no integrity and that cannot hold. There can ONLY be one Source, and that source MUST be nothing. It has to be able to NOT EXIST, yet be able to create existence. Since it doesn't exist, it cannot be divided. As such it can only ever be ONE, SINGULAR.

It's so obvious, but you don't want that because you have too much self-hatred and cannot accept the fact that you are formless infinite potentiality that does not exist as appearance, but a non appearing nothing, that created everything so it could explore itself as something and then at the end, will connect to everything there ever was and ever will be and will experience the entirety of itself at the end of its human life. The whole purpose of this thing called life is to learn what pure love is through the contrast of limited, conditional love, and to surrender your conditions, and accept yourself as Pure LOVE.  

TLDR: If you are stuck on appearance as existence then you don't understand. God is that which can exist without appearing. So explain that which has no appearance being able to be separated? A lack of appearance is everywhere, because it is the backdrop and substance of all appearance. As such it cannot have an other. It's so simple and obvious.

Edited April 26 by Razard86

[Razard86]

Some pointers to Nothing. All the events that happened in your life that you can't remember....notice they are a blank.

Before your human life....there is a blank. That also points to nothing.

Notice....there is no other there. In fact notice you can become aware of the blank.....but in that blank there isn't an other.

You see? Honesty reveals the truth. You have to create an other, when there is no creation, there is no other. So God has no other. And thus other is just a construction.

[Princess Arabia]

4 minutes ago, Razard86 said:

You are so deluded. Being can't be prior to Oneness, Being=ONENESS. You are literally making stuff up at this point. You have not sufficiently done the work to speak with any authority

Why are you such a bully on this forum. Can't people speak their minds without you constantly calling them deluded. I guess you're the only one on here that has the right to speak with authority. Everyone is where they're at and has the right to their own subjective opinions or statements or insights or whatever it is as long as they're not being intentionally disrespectful and spreading hate and what's the obvious forum violations. Even hate is allowed because that gets empathetic responses and probably needs some aide in their perspectives. 

Geesh, as soon as someone calls you out, you feel the need to have to belittle them and defend your stance. We are all here to express ourselves and if we seem to be deluded by our expressions, then that is also a part of what is. You give God rights to dumb itself down, yet you criticize and judge what you call it's dumbing down of itself. Seems to me you're the one that's deluded.

[Princess Arabia]

15 minutes ago, Razard86 said:

There can only be ONE BEING, because there can only be ONE SOURCE. If you create another source, you have to explain what created that source.

One Source would also need an explanation as to what created that one source.

[Princess Arabia]

22 minutes ago, Razard86 said:

The whole purpose of this thing called life is to learn what pure love is through the contrast of limited, conditional love, and to surrender your conditions, and accept yourself as Pure LOVE. 

This is why people get so confused. First there's a self, enlightenment is to recognize there's no you, then the no you self has to learn to love its noself, self, and accept a self that's not there as the pure love that it is already. 

Also there's a purpose for this no-thing that limited itself and came into form as a human just so it can find the purpose of why it limited itself in the first place. That I guess is the purpose for this thing called life, to find the purpose for it's purpose.

[Dodo]

45 minutes ago, Razard86 said:

You are so deluded. Being can't be prior to Oneness, Being=ONENESS. You are literally making stuff up at this point. You have not sufficiently done the work to speak with any authority.

Also, you said consciousness is ONE right? Solo=ONE. That's what the prefix means. That's why its called Solipsism. You keep trying to deny ONENESS because you don't like the implications of ONENESS. ONENESS = the only thing there is. That means it cannot have OTHER, because OTHER is ALSO IT. 

There can only be ONE BEING, because there can only be ONE SOURCE. If you create another source, you have to explain what created that source. That's what you don't understand. Your explanations fall short of truth everytime because you want the truth to be different than what it is. So you create logics with no integrity and that cannot hold. There can ONLY be one Source, and that source MUST be nothing. It has to be able to NOT EXIST, yet be able to create existence. Since it doesn't exist, it cannot be divided. As such it can only ever be ONE, SINGULAR.

It's so obvious, but you don't want that because you have too much self-hatred and cannot accept the fact that you are formless infinite potentiality that does not exist as appearance, but a non appearing nothing, that created everything so it could explore itself as something and then at the end, will connect to everything there ever was and ever will be and will experience the entirety of itself at the end of its human life. The whole purpose of this thing called life is to learn what pure love is through the contrast of limited, conditional love, and to surrender your conditions, and accept yourself as Pure LOVE.  

TLDR: If you are stuck on appearance as existence then you don't understand. God is that which can exist without appearing. So explain that which has no appearance being able to be separated? A lack of appearance is everywhere, because it is the backdrop and substance of all appearance. As such it cannot have an other. It's so simple and obvious.

I can see from your comment you are talking precisely about Being, but your mind can't help but give it subtle form by calling it 1 with no other. 

No, in fact emptiness or infinity can never be considered as 1 entity. They are not entities whatsoever, so you cannot number them.  That's what your mind fails to grasp and why you are so attached to the word Solipsism. I explain this in my posts, if you dared to really understand them. Solipsism is a horrible horrible pointer to Truth, even if it makes perfect sense to your mind. You should have alarm bells ringing when you think you understood that which cannot be understood. I am acting as those alarm bells right now. 

You need a bit of mathematical mind to clearly understand why emptiness is not 1, even thought there is no "Other" to it. It literally can't be put inside the tiny box you carved for it, something that is infinite in nature cannot be classified as One. Simple enough?  Only objects can be 1,2,3. Being is literally itself, not 1

Edited April 26 by Dodo

[Princess Arabia]

6 minutes ago, Dodo said:

You need a bit of mathematical mind to clearly understand why emptiness is not 1, even thought there is no "Other" to it. It literally can't be put inside the tiny box you carved for it, something that is infinite in nature cannot be classified as One

I agree.

[Guest Bazooka Jesus]

48 minutes ago, Princess Arabia said:

Why are you such a bully on this forum. Can't people speak their minds without you constantly calling them deluded. I guess you're the only one on here that has the right to speak with authority. Everyone is where they're at and has the right to their own subjective opinions or statements or insights or whatever it is as long as they're not being intentionally disrespectful and spreading hate and what's the obvious forum violations. Even hate is allowed because that gets empathetic responses and probably needs some aide in their perspectives. 

Geesh, as soon as someone calls you out, you feel the need to have to belittle them and defend your stance. We are all here to express ourselves and if we seem to be deluded by our expressions, then that is also a part of what is. You give God rights to dumb itself down, yet you criticize and judge what you call it's dumbing down of itself. Seems to me you're the one that's deluded.

Didn't you get the memo?

Fighting over literally nothing is Nothingness' favorite pastime.

[Princess Arabia]

18 minutes ago, Bazooka Jesus said:

Didn't you get the memo?

Fighting over literally nothing is Nothingness' favorite pastime.

Lol. Must be, it's quite funny.

[Guest Bazooka Jesus]

55 minutes ago, Princess Arabia said:

it's quite funny.

Isn't it ever? 

Even though some claim that it is veeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeery serious. Which is the funniest thing I've ever heard.

 

Edited April 26 by Bazooka Jesus

[Princess Arabia]

42 minutes ago, Bazooka Jesus said:

Isn't it ever? 

Even though some claim that it is veeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeery serious. Which is the funniest thing I've ever heard.

 

Seriously funny.

[Guest Bazooka Jesus]

31 minutes ago, Princess Arabia said:

Seriously funny.

You ain't kidding, kiddo.

[Razard86]

19 hours ago, Princess Arabia said:

Why are you such a bully on this forum. Can't people speak their minds without you constantly calling them deluded. I guess you're the only one on here that has the right to speak with authority. Everyone is where they're at and has the right to their own subjective opinions or statements or insights or whatever it is as long as they're not being intentionally disrespectful and spreading hate and what's the obvious forum violations. Even hate is allowed because that gets empathetic responses and probably needs some aide in their perspectives. 

Geesh, as soon as someone calls you out, you feel the need to have to belittle them and defend your stance. We are all here to express ourselves and if we seem to be deluded by our expressions, then that is also a part of what is. You give God rights to dumb itself down, yet you criticize and judge what you call it's dumbing down of itself. Seems to me you're the one that's deluded.

On 4/24/2024 at 0:26 PM, Davino said:

Yeah like eating chocolate ice cream and suddendly be licking shit

I'm getting used to the contrast, just give me time

Calling someone deluded is not being a bully. It is truth. You are biased by negative emotional feedback. Anytime you correct a human there is going to be a negative emotional response. This is due to the humans primal fear of death.

Humanity evolved out a natural environment in which error/making a mistake, could mean death. As such anytime you make a mistake or get called out for an error you will experience a negative emotional response.

All human bias stems from their first truth being the dissolution and minimization of negatively felt physical and emotional sensations as not love, and thus not true. This means if you cannot learn to love negative emotions and physical sensations you cannot expand and mature.

People who cannot handle correction of any kind cannot grow. And people who cannot handle physical pain will never exercise. The only way to become strong and wise is to face negative feelings. 

Notice how you just called me a bully for telling someone they are deluded. So are you saying the word deluded is an insult? It's not. The word deluded just means you are confused. It means your own intelligence is working against you. Calling someone deluded is actually a compliment because it shows you have a high enough intelligence to trick yourself. A doorknob is not capable of being deluded. It doesn't have a high enough intelligence to trick itself.

Also I wouldn't seek to correct someone who I didn't believe had the ability to escape their delusion. A function of being a honest truthful person is to call out delusion when you see it. The birth of corruption is when everyone is afraid to tell the emperor that he is naked.

 

Edited April 27 by Razard86

[Razard86]

21 hours ago, Princess Arabia said:

This is why people get so confused. First there's a self, enlightenment is to recognize there's no you, then the no you self has to learn to love its noself, self, and accept a self that's not there as the pure love that it is already. 

Also there's a purpose for this no-thing that limited itself and came into form as a human just so it can find the purpose of why it limited itself in the first place. That I guess is the purpose for this thing called life, to find the purpose for it's purpose.

Your complicating it because you love to be confused, you love mystery. The best way to understand is to become a creator.

A self is a construction. This means thing have to be arranged in a specific way for a self to be born.

Before you were your human self there was a blank/nothing. Then you popped up out of the blank. That is how you as God created yourself as a human. 

If you search your memories you will realize there is only blank and appearance. The two extremes of life. Is just that. So the answer to how did anything get here is it just appeared.

Also the answer to the one source question is this, it was always here. It's eternal. Look in your direct experience and realize blankness can't be touched because it's not physical. Only appearance needs a source. Blankness is always there, ever present. 

Also purpose is derived from being. A Lion's purpose is to eat meat. How do we know? Because that is what it expresses. It has an urge that communicates hunger and it hunts and kills and eats. It follows its programming and creates territory and mates and has offspring. That too is it's purpose. 

Humans are more complex. Because humans have the ability to create something from nothing like source mentally (in a limited way) Humans have to create their purpose after they meet their survival needs. 

But you are given clues by something called talents.

Edited April 27 by Razard86

[Princess Arabia]

2 hours ago, Razard86 said:

Calling someone deluded is not being a bully. It is truth. You are biased by negative emotional feedback. Anytime you correct a human there is going to be a negative emotional response. This is due to the humans primal fear of death.

Humanity evolved out a natural environment in which error/making a mistake, could mean death. As such anytime you make a mistake or get called out for an error you will experience a negative emotional response.

All human bias stems from their first truth being the dissolution and minimization of negatively felt physical and emotional sensations as not love, and thus not true. This means if you cannot learn to love negative emotions and physical sensations you cannot expand and mature.

People who cannot handle correction of any kind cannot grow. And people who cannot handle physical pain will never exercise. The only way to become strong and wise is to face negative feelings. 

Notice how you just called me a bully for telling someone they are deluded. So are you saying the word deluded is an insult? It's not. The word deluded just means you are confused. It means your own intelligence is working against you. Calling someone deluded is actually a compliment because it shows you have a high enough intelligence to trick yourself. A doorknob is not capable of being deluded. It doesn't have a high enough intelligence to trick itself.

Also I wouldn't seek to correct someone who I didn't believe had the ability to escape their delusion. A function of being a honest truthful person is to call out delusion when you see it. The birth of corruption is when everyone is afraid to tell the emperor that he is naked.

 

Ok

[Princess Arabia]

9 minutes ago, Razard86 said:

Also the answer to the one source question is this, it was always here. It's eternal.

Yes, I understand that. I'm just saying I don't think calling it source is appropriate since a source also needs a source whether its blankness or not. I guess it's just word games at this point - but for explanatory reasons.

Edited April 27 by Princess Arabia

[Razard86]

1 hour ago, Princess Arabia said:

Yes, I understand that. I'm just saying I don't think calling it source is appropriate since a source also needs a source whether its blankness or not. I guess it's just word games at this point - but for explanatory reasons.

A source doesn't need a source that is only within the realm of appearance. Go meta, and realize an eternal blank has to be the source. 

Because if blank creates blank, it would still be blank. You see? In the world of something, something creates something.

In the world of blank, there is no creation, because to create blank would just be blank. To do blank would just be blank. Blank is self-negating. That is why it is selfless. It negates construction of any kind.

And that is why it is limitless and has no other because it is blank.

Edited April 27 by Razard86

[Dodo]

@Razard86 you are a human, you are not a bee.