Awareness and naive realism

[StephenK]

13 minutes ago, Thanatos13 said:

Assuming there is any dream at all, or Maya.

If you want to debate philosophy go to a philosophy forum. If you want to confirm your beliefs then come here.

I personally treat any claims of the “spiritual”nature with a huge grain of salt. Especially with anything like the “absolute”. 

I also don’t find the contrarian position lazy, what’s lazy is glorifying what Leo says as truth. Every forum needs a contrarian (provides they are good ones and not just “no you’re not”). 

I'd gladly debate with you on this matter, but only if you articulate the frameworks with which you build your perception of reality, otherwise it just ends up in chaos.  Do you hold that scientific empiricism is a useful tool in debate? When in conflict with subjective experience, scientific empiricism (which is also subjective, but we'll ignore that for now) is the preferred explanation for a situation? If so, scientific empiricism proves non-duality and not-self without a doubt.

Edited February 6, 2018 by StephenK

[Patang]

@Thanatos13 now look, everything you are aware of is totally subjective, you experience reality only from your subjective senses. reality is your private dream. you can not tell anything about others in your reality/dream, are they real or just an extra in you dream. the only thing you can tell is that you exists in some form, all the rest are just stories, thus not true... and this is the truth.

[Shin]

3 minutes ago, Patang said:

@Thanatos13 now look, everything you are aware of is totally subjective, you experience reality only from your subjective senses. reality is your private dream. you can not tell anything about others in your reality/dream, are they real or just an extra in you dream. the only thing you can tell is that you exists in some form, all the rest are just stories, thus not true... and this is the truth.

1 hour ago, Patang said:

 

So it's a sort of lucid dream ?

[Leo Gura]

@StephenK Mouse and I don't really disagree on much. It's mostly just a difference in emphasis and style. He wants you to take a very narrow approach, pure neti neti -- because that's the approach that apparently worked well for him. There is value in that if your only concern is the direct pursuit of the Absolute and nothing else matters to you and you are 100% motivated to get to the Absolute.

For a few people that will work. But for most people it will not simply because they have a lot of psychological obstacles to deal with first and they won't resonate with neti neti. Each path has its pros and cons.

And then there are issues outside of the domain of strict nonduality, like epistemology or philosophy of science or mastering your emotions or how to be a good human being or what you should do with your life... none of which will be adequately addressed by neti neti or any other one method or teaching.

The fuel of all these spiritual debates is that one person tries to push his spiritual path onto everyone else because he feels his path is the best, assuming it will work for everyone else. This assumption is totally false. But that doesn't stop the person from trying because he's a firm believer in his one path. Because most people haven't seriously walked multiple paths and they have been radicalize by one teacher or another and turned into zealots.

There's nothing new about this. It's been happening since the dawn of time. Everyone believes their path is the best and should be adopted by everyone else.

You have to appreciate that reaching enlightenment is a totally separate matter from effectively teaching and spreading enlightenment. The greatest spiritual achievers are not necessarily the greatest spreaders and teachers. The teacher has to meet the student where the student is at. And many enlightened people don't know how to do that. In the same way that the best physicists are rarely the best physics teachers.

To whittle all of life down to neti neti is extremely short-sighted in my opinion. And as a teacher, it doesn't make sense to me. As a teacher, I have to be open to a variety of tools and methods. There are SO many amazing tools for raising consciousness and personal development that I would never want to abandon them all for neti neti.

Some spiritual paths are very narrow, emphasizing only the Absolute.

Other spiritual paths are very broad, emphasizing diet, right conduct, compassion, psychological development, paranormal abilities, right relationships, etc.

Neither one is best. There are tradeoffs to each and you have to choose for yourself which is right for you at which time in your life.

Personally, I employ both types of teachings, narrow and broad. I find both incredibly worthwhile.

[Patang]

@Shin kind of.  this is how it looks like from "my" point of view, from where i am... and if you want to see it too, you have to come here and see it for yourself 

[Shin]

7 minutes ago, Patang said:

@Shin kind of.  this is how it looks like from "my" point of view, from where i am... and if you want to see it too, you have to come here and see it for yourself 

The last lucid dream I had was so beautiful that If what you say is actually true, I would cry for days

[Patang]

9 minutes ago, Shin said:

The last lucid dream I had was so beautiful that If what you say is actually true, I would cry for days

yes, yes, although "beautiful" is subjective and judgmental, it is what it is and can be seen only from one's eyes.

[Shin]

20 minutes ago, Patang said:

yes, yes, although "beautiful" is subjective and judgmental, it is what it is and can be seen only from one's eyes.

20 minutes ago, Patang said:

 

Let me get on board

[Patang]

@Shin i've published a topic named "my path to enlightenment", take a look... 

[Leo Gura]

2 hours ago, StephenK said:

I personally don't really know what's true anymore, but the philosophical foundations of your and mighty mouse's positions are very interesting.

That's key the lesson of epistemology: you do not know who to trust. And you don't even know if you can trust yourself. Hence you must investigate all these matters for yourself from scratch with a totally open mind and see what your investigation will reveal. If you assume ahead of time that you know what will be revealed, that is a mistake. That's closedmindedness.

So, for example, if you've never tried a psychedelic and you think you know what it is or isn't, you've made an epistemic blunder. Because nothing can be know a priori without 1st hand investigation and empirical validation. This sort of mistake is extremely common even among the most intelligent of people.

You cannot even know that 1+1=2 until you sit down and actually do the math and see what's what for yourself.

Hence Actualized.org teachings are not to be believed, but investigated and validated or falsified by YOU, personally, intimately, using utmost care.

[Key Elements]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

That's key the lesson of epistemology: you do not know who to trust. And you don't even know if you can trust yourself. Hence you must investigate all these matters for yourself from scratch with a totally open mind and see what your investigation will reveal. If you assume ahead of time that you know what will be revealed, that is a mistake. That's closedmindedness.

So, for example, if you've never tried a psychedelic and you think you know what it is or isn't, you've made an epistemic blunder. Because nothing can be know a priori without 1st hand investigation and empirical validation. This sort of mistake is extremely common even among the most intelligent of people.

You cannot even know that 1+1=2 until you sit down and actually do the math and see what's what for yourself.

Hence Actualized.org teachings are not to be believed, but investigated and validated or falsified by YOU, personally, intimately, using utmost care.

There is no right or wrong. There is choice. Of course take into consideration radical open-mindedness, but not everything can be tried by everyone. One size doesn’t fit all. The decision to try whatever it is in life has to be a wise one and well thought out. Everyone doesn't have the same outcome / consequences, esp when dealing with the Absolute. 

[StephenK]

23 hours ago, Mighty Mouse said:

Maybe not in theory, but we very much disagree on the reality of this whole thing. Our "difference in emphasis and style" is that it's easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for you to bring everything and the kitchen sink with you on this path. Or for you to anticipate and plan for what life will be like afterward. Or for you to know that your "100s of datapoints" are actually representative of anything.

You see, this point of view genuinely perplexes me. I understand that everything is regarded as maya, but this fact does not negate the persistence of the illusion we're faced with. Would you simply go without food for the rest of your life since it is all maya? Would you drink bleach when you're thirsty? I'd assume not, and that you'd conform your actions to live in accordance with the rules of the dream as they are manifesting now in this present moment. If you do follow the rules of the dream (food, water, thought, action, etc), then you are living in accordance with the illusion to an extent, which means you living your  own manifested Dharma (duties, rights, laws, conduct, etc) to navigate the illusion. I find it disingenuous that you'd imply that you could pass through this 'needle' with any more ease than Leo would. Please enlighten me if I've somehow misrepresented your position on the matter.

[StephenK]

Just now, Mighty Mouse said:

Sorry but nobody can enlighten anyone.

Sigh. So no response then? 

[Nahm]

@StephenK Experience the absolute. Then you can see through this. There is no other way. This is why the word absolute is chosen. Otherwise, we’re just dogs chasing tails. 

[SOUL]

There is considerable naive mysticism within spirituality so it produces extreme mythical and magical ideologies that are denying and distorting of the physical manifest. Just as there is considerable naive realism within materialism that produces nihilist and cynical ideologies that are denying and distorting of the subjective metaphysical experience.

Uniting into a whole experience accepting it for what it is as a holistic life appears to be one of the rarest pursuits, a realist spirituality or a spiritual realism... either way, it's seems to be the path least traveled but for my own life it's the way that is most fulfilling.