Enlightenment Debunked - A deep epistemological analysis of the non dual perspective

[Anton Rogachevski]

I can agree that what Leo is depicting is "The Basic Epistemic Ground" (what basically can be known to a mind) - It's in fact a phenomenological study of the solipsistic nature of experience and a recognition that all there is to an experiencer from his perspective is what's within the mind. Yes the mind is only aware of itself, that's by design - that is the veil of perception fully seen! 

I would say that it's correct to call enlightenment "insanity", because it's actually a complete loss of touch with the objective world. Since our touch with it is only belief based, it's necessary to see through it in order to get in touch with the fundamental truth of an enclosed self consciousness. Sanity is when you still assume there is an objective world outside of awareness.

Is sanity worth losing for the sake of experiencing this phenomenological truth? Why would one want that?

I think it's more epistemically humble to admit that it's a phenomenological study of phenomenological truths, and not an ontological study of reality. To even assume that a human brain can understand and explain reality itself by simple introspection is ludicrous. It's a hidden metaphysical assumption, and I'm not willing to grant it.

I know that if I Do follow the practice I will also lose touch with reality and start assuming that I know all of reality, but it doesn't sound very safe or wise actually. The most you can say about it is that's it's a cool hack of the brain, and that it feels cool(and absolutely horrific at times), that I'll grant. 

It seems that "enlightenment work" is letting Descartes' Evil Demon deceive you fully until you stop believing that anything concrete is even possible. When you say everything is hallucination, an infinite hallucination - The demon has won!

The evil demon can by definition create things that don't exist or make sense, or create a feeling of knowing the "truth" since he's an all powerful demon. He can make you believe you are God and that you know everything, and it will feel that way, but that doesn't make it necessarily true.

The fact that illusion exists and is aware of itself doesn't affect the world outside, only the one trapped in the illusion. If you start believing in illusion without any doubt just because you are aware of it and there is nothing else but it, you are by definition delusional, because you are like the prisoner in Plato's cave that says that "The shadows on the walls are all that exists." Not only that, but you go a step further into delusion and say now that you've understood everything outside the cave, all there is to know, just because you've seen the shadows on the walls fully. That's a scary notion at that.

God is also everything outside the cave, that which you can't know, and will never know by definition - You are a baboon trying understand special relativity, it's impossible - it's too complex by definition for a limited brain that's built for survival in the jungle. 

Perception is not existence, it's an appearance. You will say that it exists as an appearance, ok, but still it's a limited and non important sort of existence - like the idea of a unicorn. It is very important for the experiencer, because that's all he has, and will ever have (The veil of perception), but still it doesn't affect physical reality nor does it explain it, nor can it debunk it from the inside of the cave.

How good do you think my argument is? What do I miss? Does it make sense to you? Would enlightenment make me shut up about it? How well can you function post enlightenment? What's more sane: believing in the "objective" or deconstructing it completely?

@Leo Gura

Edited March 30 by Anton Rogachevski

[Davino]

You are going in the right direction but there's one blind spot which is causing you great trouble.

You still believe you are a human, with a brain, making sense of the world, in a society, happening in a big planet orbiting the sun that was created in the big bang.

This whole story is just a figment of your mind, literally, you can toss it out and see what is actually this moment, this experience and allow yourself to be absolutely ungrounded, may reality be naked, pure and direct. Everything becomes magical and a great mystery indeed.

[Anton Rogachevski]

@Davino Yep that's all absolutely true phenomenologically, but is out of touch with what is probable. These constructs are what sanity is, and at the end of the day we do have to function as "humans" in a "human society".

Is it still easy to function normally when it's all seen through?

Edited March 29 by Anton Rogachevski

[Yimpa]

@Anton Rogachevski I answer your question here:

 

[Anton Rogachevski]

@Yimpa I guess the ego is afraid of dissolution and is holding on to "sanity" to keep intact.

What worries me is all the thinking that when you get it you can suddenly "understand all of metaphysics" that sounds delusional and over optimistic. In that sense it is a loss of sanity.

You can absolutely know yourself since you are it, but yourself is not all there is in a probable sense. It's seems that "enlightenment" is a dive into solipsistic insanity that closes you off from the rest of the world.

Edited March 29 by Anton Rogachevski

[Yimpa]

9 minutes ago, Anton Rogachevski said:

You can absolutely know yourself since you are it, but yourself is not all there is in a probable sense. It's seems that "enlightened" is a dive into solipsistic insanity that closes you off from the rest of the world.

Go back 3 spaces:

 

[Anton Rogachevski]

There's much thought and care put into steel manning that counter argument. I update it by the hour as more insight is gained, so please do revisit and read the edited and polished version with more analogies and detail.  I believe that in order for the next video of the proof to be as effective and powerful, you may need it to answer this argument here too.

@Leo Gura @Yimpa @Davino

Edited March 29 by Anton Rogachevski

[Breakingthewall]

13 hours ago, Davino said:

You still believe you are a human, with a brain, making sense of the world, in a society, happening in a big planet orbiting the sun that was created in the big bang.

Well, that's true, you're human and all that. One doesn't eliminate the other. The fact is that in an infinite framework, all that Big Bang stuff is irrelevant. It's not false, it's circumstantial. The only absolute is the infinite being; everything else is a matter of particular circumstances among infinite possibilities

[Breakingthewall]

19 hours ago, Anton Rogachevski said:

is also everything outside the cave, that which you can't know, and will never know by definition - You are a baboon trying understand special relativity, it's impossible - it's too complex by definition for a limited brain that's built for survival in the jungl

You can understand that reality has not limits, then all possibilities take place. You can also understand that within an infinite framework, a concrete possibility is the same as zero. It is something if you situate yourself in a relative finite perspective, and nothing if you situate yourself in an absolute infinite perspective.

Seeing this, you can realize that only the substance of reality is absolute, and its form is relative. This means that it exists in relation to another form, since within an infinite framework, there are no reference points for something to vibrate, move, or take form.

Understanding this, you can understand that any relative appearance must be perfectly synchronized with another relative appearance in order to exist as an appearance. If you have already understood that reality has no limits, you will understand that all the infinite possible relative forms in infinite dimensions must be perfectly synchronized with each other, since the slightest lack of synchronicity would mean the non-appearance of that form and all its infinite lineage.

If you understand this, you will understand that within an infinite framework, absolute being is inevitable, but so is infinite relative form. You will understand that the limitless infinite is absolutely synchronous down to the smallest energetic vibration. And you will understand that these vibrations are absolute being reflecting itself to infinite power. So, you will understand what reality is. It's not that complicated; the human mind is made to understand reality.

Edited March 29 by Breakingthewall

[Anton Rogachevski]

@Breakingthewall No doubt it sounds profound, but it's an extrapolation of the nature of mind, your personal subjective mind onto reality, with which you don't actually have contact with, except through a limited ape perception and some assumptions. Reality is not affected by perception of objects, it has no objects, it has no relativity in the same way ideas are related to one another like "good and bad".

Reality is very much limited by natural laws.

Edited March 29 by Anton Rogachevski

[Breakingthewall]

36 minutes ago, Anton Rogachevski said:

@Breakingthewall No doubt it sounds profound, but it's an extrapolation of the nature of mind, your personal subjective mind onto reality, with which you don't actually have contact with, except through a limited ape perception and some assumptions. Reality is not affected by perception of objects, it has no objects, it has no relativity in the same way ideas are related to one another like "good and bad".

Reality is very much limited by natural laws.

Experiential observation isn't necessary to deduce that within an unlimited framework, this configuration of reality is one possibility among infinite ones, and that its laws are circumstantial.

It's also not difficult to understand that my experiential field is total reality, in the sense that it is the infinite being acquiring a particular dimension. Therefore, there will be infinite other variations of this dimension. If you understand this, you will see that the characteristics of this dimension are irrelevant compared to the substance of this dimension, which is your infinite nature, but they are relevant from your relative perspective, since they are the only reality that exists at this moment.

Moment equals dimension, therefore, it's inevitable that you, the infinite being, are unfolding in infinite other dimensions right now. They all collapse into nothing if you realize that they only exist in relation to themselves. They are like a game of mirrors, an infinite kaleidoscope in infinite motion. A prehistoric guy could deduce this. What you call the simian mind is a perfect mechanism capable of understanding absolutely everything. Nothing is incomprehensible to the mind. It's unknowable, but understandable in its main lines. You just have to unlock the mind's potential.

[Anton Rogachevski]

@Breakingthewall How do you know that it's an "unlimited framework" what even is that? Where is it? What is "reality"? Where is it? How do you know there are infinite possible realities? To know even one would be an amazing achievement, no one knows or can know what is "reality" it's absolutely mystical.

14 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

It's also not difficult to understand that my experiential field is total reality

How is that known?

15 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

A prehistoric guy could deduce this.

I highly doubt that, and how can anyone deduce such a fantastical story?

[Breakingthewall]

23 minutes ago, Anton Rogachevski said:

no one knows or can know what is "reality" it's absolutely mystical.

Reality is absolutely simple to know: it's me

23 minutes ago, Anton Rogachevski said:

How is that known?

Because reality cannot have limits; it's absolutely impossible. Limits are appearances that arise within reality. Reality has no beginning or end; it's absolutely obvious, inevitable, and observable. Right now, I'm observing unchanging reality directly, and all apparent limits and forms that appear are forms relative to other forms. If you look through them, you'll see yourself as infinite substance. Infinite doesn't mean large or enormous; it means it has no dimension; dimensions arise within it. Reality is, period. Being has no limits; it's an absolute impossibility.

 

28 minutes ago, Anton Rogachevski said:

highly doubt that, and how can anyone deduce such a fantastical story?

They did in bahavad gita, also the american natives, probably the Australian aboriginals, and anyone who transcend the form and realize the substance. It's simple, you don't need to be specially smart, just break all the barriers. 

30 minutes ago, Anton Rogachevski said:

What is "reality"? Where is it?

It's here, don't you see it?

[Anton Rogachevski]

@Breakingthewall

Sounds profound, but I'm afraid we're going in circles and returning to the same basic assumption that your direct experience of the simulation of your ape mind is somehow indicative of the ontology of reality, and can explain it and understand it. Why not admit that you are simply studying your personal phenomenon, and it has no relation at all to actual reality. It's a dream within a dream. Phenomenology is cool, I love it,  that's why I'm here, but why ruin it's name with extraordinarily optimistic claims of understanding actual reality?

55 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

It's here, don't you see it?

There are appearance: colors, shapes, sounds, feelings, etc 
Where within these phenomenon can you see "reality"? It's light on a screen, and it can turn off in any instant. I can't see any reality, nor does that word mean anything to me. Phenomenologically speaking nothing is real nor is it imaginary, it simply appears.

Edited March 29 by Anton Rogachevski

[Breakingthewall]

29 minutes ago, Anton Rogachevski said:

It's a dream within a dream. Phenomenology is cool, I love it,  that's why I'm here, but why ruin it's name with extraordinarily optimistic claims of understanding actual reality?

Because it's absolutely obvious. There are no fractions in infinity; they are the whole infinity. There are no dreams, there are only appearances. A dream implies a dreamer; there isn't one. If you realize the unlimited being everything else is obvious.

29 minutes ago, Anton Rogachevski said:

There are appearance: colors, shapes, sounds, feelings, etc 
Where within these phenomenon can you see reality?

You are the reality, the frame where those appearances appear, better the substance. It's here, always, the being. Remove everything, any structure, phenomenon, sensation, what remains is the pure being, and it's unlimited. Then many structures arise, and you see what they are

Edited March 29 by Breakingthewall

[Anton Rogachevski]

36 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

Because it's absolutely obvious. There are no fractions in infinity; they are the whole infinity. There are no dreams, there are only appearances. A dream implies a dreamer; there isn't one. If you realize the unlimited being everything else is obvious.

You are the reality, the frame where those appearances appear, better the substance. It's here, always, the being. Remove everything, any structure, phenomenon, sensation, what remains is the pure being, and it's unlimited. Then many structures arise, and you see what they are

Part of it's nature is that it appears infinite. The fact that it appears that way doesn't actually mean it is infinite. It's simply how experience is constructed - you can't actually perceive and ending or a beginning but only imagine them.

There's no dreamer, just the infinite dream of God. 

36 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

Because it's absolutely obvious.

It's not obvious, it seems obvious because the evil demon has fooled you into feeling self assured like that. Nothing is obvious, and if anything seems that way to you, remember you are being fooled again.

Edited March 29 by Anton Rogachevski

[Anton Rogachevski]

13 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

You are the reality

"Me"? There's no such thing. Also "reality", this word doesn't mean anything or point anywhere in my experience. It's a nonsensical word, the same as ablubadub.

Edited March 29 by Anton Rogachevski

[Breakingthewall]

1 hour ago, Anton Rogachevski said:

Part of it's nature is that it appears infinite.

It is absolutely impossible for what exists to cease to exist. If you understand what existence is, it's nature, you understand that it is essentially immutable. It is not something that elapses in time. Time occurs in existence as a measure of the movements that occur, but existence itself is timeless. It's not a question of someone telling me so; it's just that it's impossible for it to be any other way. 

[Breakingthewall]

1 hour ago, Anton Rogachevski said:

"Me"? There's no such thing. Also "reality", this word doesn't mean anything or point anywhere in my experience. It's a nonsensical word, the same as ablubadub.

Means that you are what is. You are right? Then being is existence. It's a word to point something, and quite simple, not something mystic and very sacred, it's simply the reality now

[Anton Rogachevski]

1 minute ago, Breakingthewall said:

It is absolutely impossible for what exists to cease to exist. If you understand what existence is, it's nature, you understand that it is essentially immutable. It is not something that elapses in time. Time occurs in existence as a measure of the movements that occur, but existence itself is timeless. It's not a question of someone telling me so; it's just that it's impossible for it to be any other way. 

It appears timeless. There can't be anything infinite in actual reality, because an infinite object or anything infinite is impossible under the currently known natural laws as far as we know.