"Believing in a physical world blocks enlightenment"

[Heart of Space]

1 minute ago, Faceless said:

 Hmm?? ? 

 ✂️ it out lol u rascal lol ? 

You know sometimes when I take messy poops, you know the softer wetter ones, I often will wipe a few times and then wet the toilet paper so that I can clean my bunghole better.  It makes me feel more secure about my booty hygiene.  

[Faceless]

9 minutes ago, Heart of Space said:

You know sometimes when I take messy poops, you know the softer wetter ones, I often will wipe a few times and then wet the toilet paper so that I can clean my bunghole better.  It makes me feel more secure about my booty hygiene.  

Well now your making some sense ?

u know there are wet wipes now?‍♀️

Edited January 31, 2018 by Faceless

[Heart of Space]

30 minutes ago, Faceless said:

Well now your making some sense ?

u know there are wet wipes now?‍♀️

I'm a bit of a penny pincher, so I use my self created ghetto wipes.  When I'm in my parents bathroom, there are preparation H wet wipes and I it's a real treat for my butthole when I get to use them.  

[Faceless]

12 minutes ago, Heart of Space said:

I'm a bit of a penny pincher, so I use my self created ghetto wipes.  When I'm in my parents bathroom, there are preparation H wet wipes and I it's a real treat for my butthole when I get to use them.  

Lolol 

Self creation within practical affairs OK ?? 

[SOUL]

1 hour ago, Heart of Space said:

True they are what we call words, but that's all they are.  Now point the beliefs that are in my subjective experience.  Can you?  Rhetorical question.  The answer is no because you don't know my reality.  

Could I be full of shit as you seem to think?  The answer is yes because everyone has the potential to be full of shit.  Whether or not you see me as full of shit, or actually giving an intelligible thing to say is up to your interpretation.  

You see me as full of shit, and contradicting myself, because that's how you interpret the words on your screen next to my name.  That's fine.  You've received nothing of value from me and that's ok.  Hopefully the OP got something of value, but if he too thinks I'm full of shit that's ok too.  Good day, m'lord.  

 

It wasn't my intention to interpret or estimate how full you are or consider if there any contradictions, just illuminate the beliefs in your words since you believe believing any narrative about reality is not enlightenment.

Edited January 31, 2018 by SOUL

[Heart of Space]

1 hour ago, SOUL said:

It wasn't my intention to interpret or estimate how full you are or consider if there any contradictions, just illuminate the beliefs in your words since you believe believing any narrative about reality is not enlightenment.

I think you're misunderstanding me a bit.  I said that any belief is not enlightenment, as in the belief itself is not what enlightenment is.  Enlightenment is reality as it is, at least that is a facet of it.   Beliefs happen, I'm not trying to belief shame or anything like that.  Only pointing out what I did because people get caught up in the very alluring intellectual entertainment of hypothesizing about what reality is or isn't.  There's an easy mistake to make if you're seeking enlightenment and you question your belief in physical reality only to replace that with an equally strongly held belief in another narrative about reality.  Does that make sense, or am I still losing you?  

[SOUL]

9 hours ago, Heart of Space said:

I think you're misunderstanding me a bit.  I said that any belief is not enlightenment, as in the belief itself is not what enlightenment is.  Enlightenment is reality as it is, at least that is a facet of it.   Beliefs happen, I'm not trying to belief shame or anything like that.  Only pointing out what I did because people get caught up in the very alluring intellectual entertainment of hypothesizing about what reality is or isn't.  There's an easy mistake to make if you're seeking enlightenment and you question your belief in physical reality only to replace that with an equally strongly held belief in another narrative about reality.  Does that make sense, or am I still losing you?  

It's very understandable, you have a belief paradigm of what it's not and what it's only so that there is an infinitesimal hoop you believe you need to hop through. Your own beliefs are limiting your own experience and then you are going on to tell others that their experience is like your experience.

None of that makes any sense, I don't know why you do it, I encourage you to lose that mindset.

[Heart of Space]

23 minutes ago, SOUL said:

It's very understandable, you have a belief paradigm of what it's not and what it's only so that there is an infinitesimal hoop you believe you need to hop through. Your own beliefs are limiting your own experience and then you are going on to tell others that their experience is like your experience.

None of that makes any sense, I don't know why you do it, I encourage you to lose that mindset.

Oh ok, take the 'only' out then if you feel that's misleading in some way.  Getting to is-ness is a way to enlightenment.  Do you like that better?  

[SOUL]

55 minutes ago, Heart of Space said:

Oh ok, take the 'only' out then if you feel that's misleading in some way.  Getting to is-ness is a way to enlightenment.  Do you like that better?  

Whether it is likeable or not is of little consequence, what effect on our being present does a belief paradigm have is more significant.

[Heart of Space]

6 minutes ago, SOUL said:

Whether it is likeable or not is of little consequence, what effect on our being present does a belief paradigm have is more significant.

You're being a bit of a stickler about my words, my man.  Replace 'Do you like that better,' with 'do you find removing the only from the sentence more appropriate as advice for the original poster?'  You're being a bit close minded about how I use my words and in addition you're making assumptions about what I believe and how strongly those beliefs are held.  Words are just words, if you understand the fallibility of words and their meaning you'd be a little more open minded in your approach to talking to me.  I'm genuinely trying to meet you in this discussion, but it seems you're intent on finding something wrong with what I say.  If this is the case there is nothing I can say that you will agree with and us talking is ultimately fruitless.  Discussion full of fruit is pretty awesome wouldn't you say?  

[SpaceCowboy]

On ‎29‎.‎01‎.‎2018 at 2:33 AM, zedprotect said:

In his live video about his enlightenemnt experience, Leo said that believing in a physical world is the reason people don't get enlightened. Somehow, this sentence had an effect on me for the past few days. I strongly believe that he's got something important here, and that we should stop and ponder about it. I think I resonated quite a bit with that since it's a topic I've been questionning a bit for the past few months. 

@zedprotect  I've also been questioning this topic lately. What I struggle most with is that a lot of the stuff we talk about in spirituality such as consciousness, awareness, the ultimate, kundalini, nonduality, spirit, god, samadhi, bliss, presence etc. bla bla doensn't necessarily contradict the paradigm of a (physical) world we know. Because a physical world does not exclude subjective experiences. 

For example:

• Recognizing that you're not your thoughts, but the observer/awareness behind the thoughts, doesn't automatically mean that consciousness is fundamental and that you are in essence "the absolute" (whatever this is). This could solely be the process of a physical brain becoming aware of itself. How the fuck can you know that what you're conscious of is of any trustworthiness? How do you know it is not any subjective bullshit experience?
• Same goes for psychedelics. How the hell would you know that what you're experiencing is not just a simple halluzination? Yes, I get it: It seems like your whole world collapses and this altered state seems super real to you. But guess what, your brain can make you believe anything it wants!
• And yes, there is the Ego with all it's selfish needs and wants and inferior motives and self-deception. Ok, but this doesn't prove anything about a spiritual dimension.
• Kundalini could be just some regular neural stimulation that affects the brain in certain ways
• Spontaneous epiphanies or "awakening experiences" could also be just brain stuff

It seems to me like a lot of this spirituality stuff is the ego's way of trying to construct a new illusory reality for itself, in order to be free of suffering. Can't it just be that if you tell our moldable brain long enough: "Hey, I am not this human body, I am the whole universe" (which in a sense is true because all is the same physical matter) it will eventually believe it and thus relieve the "person" of suffering because of the depersonalization process that has taken place. And the possible illusion that you might be the ultimate consciousness or whatever could also be welcome by suffering brain.

What if there really is a physical universe (which we do not yet fully understand, and probably never completely will) and the emergent brain phenomenon "consciousness" of an evolved lifeform in the person of Eckhard Tolle is telling somebody just this very moment: "you are not your thoughts, you are infinite awareness bla bla"...

This, of course, it just some input to think about. I always try to keep an open mind and be aware of the possibility that truth might be beyond my accessibility. But maybe not.

Edited January 31, 2018 by SpaceCowboy

[SOUL]

@Heart of Space   I don't  really have any issues with your words or your beliefs since they aren't mine but what is apparent in them is they reflect a limiting beliefs paradigm. There's a lot of that going on with Enlightenment and in spirituality so my apologies for attempting to bring it to your awareness. So be it.

[Heart of Space]

10 minutes ago, SOUL said:

@Heart of Space   I don't  really have any issues with your words or your beliefs since they aren't mine but what is apparent in them is they reflect a limiting beliefs paradigm. There's a lot of that going on with Enlightenment and in spirituality so my apologies for attempting to bring it to your awareness. So be it.

No need to apologize, man.  Good luck to you.  

[Joseph Maynor]

 

[Will Bigger]

the logic for a consciousness-only existence is... really solid. 

basically you only can be sure consciousness exists.

so there's no reason to assume anything is outside consciousness

so, instead, the regularities and consensus of life is because there is one consciousness, conscious of everything, holding it all in place. 

that's idealism. and then nonduality goes one step further: you are identical to that larger consciousness

Edited February 2, 2018 by Will Bigger