How is life just a dream?

[SOUL]

@7thLetter  Leo didn't "come up with this insight", it's a regurgitated belief that has been circulating for a very long time. It's also a very slumbering dualism mindset that perceives the physical experience of the manifest as an opposite to spiritual experience and if you wish to transcend any duality in the mind you will not adopt this belief paradigm as your own.

Haha

Edited February 14, 2018 by SOUL

[Nahm]

@SOUL You are also conflating, you’re just not aware of it yet. When you do become aware of it, it is revealed how obvious it was all along. You can ‘proof’ to “yourself” the illusion. You can not look to the illusion and prove it’s reality. That is obviously impossible, because ‘the dream worl’ Lol is not a belief, that it is real, is a self imposed belief.

[snowleopard]

@7thLetter  This point has been addressed in other threads related to Leo's 'Life is a Dream' video, and of course I can only give an interpretation of what he's getting at, but I see it as an allegory intended to loosen the grip of the materialist paradigm and the idea that there is a mind-independent world of matter 'out there', and that consciousness is an emergent property of that world of matter. So to turn that around, and place consciousness as the fundamental essence of being and the source of all phenomena, it may be useful to see that all phenomena are the emanations of a cosmic consciousness, and therefore can be called dreamlike in essence. So in that regard it may be a useful pointer. But, of course, like all such pointers and models, it must be seen in the context of the opening few lines of the Tao Te Ching: "The Tao that can be told, is not the eternal Tao." But if it's taken for what it's intended to achieve, and it serves that purpose, then it can be let go of without getting hung up in the allegory.

[Joseph Maynor]

19 minutes ago, snowleopard said:

@7thLetter  This point has been addressed in other threads related to Leo's 'Life is a Dream' video, and of course I can only give an interpretation of what he's getting at, but I see it as an allegory intended to loosen the grip of the materialist paradigm and the idea that there is a mind-independent world of matter 'out there', and that consciousness is an emergent property of that world of matter. So to turn that around, and place consciousness as the fundamental essence of being and the source of all phenomena, it may be useful to see that all phenomena are the emanations of a cosmic consciousness, and therefore can be called dreamlike in essence. So in that regard it may be a useful pointer. But, of course, like all such pointers and models, it must be seen in the context of the opening few lines of the Tao Te Ching: "The Tao that can be told, is not the eternal Tao." But if it's taken for what it's intended to achieve, and it serves that purpose, then it can be let go of without getting hung up in the allegory.

Thats what I thought it was too.  But Leo needed to make that clear.  The way he presents it is as a literal truth about reality.  There’s a huge difference there.  Loosening up the materialist paradigm would make his thesis a counter-weight paradigm to the dominant materialist paradigm — with the express intent to deprogram both paradigms from being seen as true.  But Leo never makes that clear in the video.  In contrast, Leo has more of a tone of “let me tell you what’s true here — reality is a dream.”  Ah — no dude — that’s just more dogma if taken that way.  Do you see my concern?

Edited February 14, 2018 by Joseph Maynor

[snowleopard]

@SOUL  But this dualism can be transcended, as Shankara attempts to do in the quote I posted above, as it points to the 'Dreamer' and its 'Dream' as being not two, and thus the apparent real/unreal dichotomy is resolved.

[snowleopard]

1 minute ago, Joseph Maynor said:

Do you see my concern?

Well Leo, wherever he may be, will have to address that concern.

[Joseph Maynor]

21 minutes ago, snowleopard said:

Well Leo, wherever he may be, will have to address that concern.

You have a lot to say but then always clam up when we get to the crux of the issue.  I asked if YOU see my concern.  Now — why did you clam up and deflect there as you did?  You need to develop the guts to stand by your positions to the end.  If they die they die — if they live another day, then so be it too.  But don’t run away when you sense danger of being deprived of your cherished notions.  Assume your notions are probably wrong instead.  You wanna be right though.  But if you really wanna be right — you have to see that that never works!  You always end the dispute before you realize that.  The Ego never lets you get there!  I’ve seen that pattern with you over and over again.  You never let things get to that point.  You never dive-deep enough to get there.  You just end the discussion to preserve your Ego every time.  But that is not helping you!  That is keeping you stuck in a trap almost like a self-consistent bubble.  And that bubble will be protected no matter what.  Am I right?  

Edited February 14, 2018 by Joseph Maynor

[snowleopard]

@Joseph Maynor

14 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

 Am I right?

If that's what you believe, so be it. How can I possibly know for sure what Leo intended? That seems like a rather arrogant claim. At best one can speculate about what he intended, but it seems fair to just let him speak for himself.

[Joseph Maynor]

42 minutes ago, SOUL said:

@7thLetter  Leo didn't "come up with this insight", it's a regurgitated belief that has been circulating for a very long time. It's also a very slumbering dualism mindset that perceives the physical experience of the manifest as an opposite to spiritual experience and if you wish to transcend any duality in the mind you will not adopt this belief paradigm as your own.

Haha

SOUL — What do you think Leo was trying to communicate in the Dream Video, assuming you watched it?  I’ll watch it again now and see if my ideas change about it.

Edited February 14, 2018 by Joseph Maynor

[SOUL]

37 minutes ago, Nahm said:

@SOUL You are also conflating, you’re just not aware of it yet. When you do become aware of it, it is revealed how obvious it was all along. You can ‘proof’ to “yourself” the illusion. You can not look to the illusion and prove it’s reality. That is obviously impossible, because ‘the dream worl’ Lol is not a belief, that it is real, is a self imposed belief.

Conflating what?

I am aware of it...that "it" being the dualism in your perception that you aren't aware of yet. I don't have to impose any belief for the manifest to exist, it just does, that you think you can "proof to yourself the illusion" is a self imposed belief, one based in duality.

[SOUL]

38 minutes ago, snowleopard said:

@SOUL  But this dualism can be transcended, as Shankara attempts to do in the quote I posted above, as it points to the 'Dreamer' and its 'Dream' as being not two, and thus the apparent real/unreal dichotomy is resolved.

Except that isn't the dualism being expressed by "life is a dream", it's the real-illusion duality that people interpret as real-not real. It isn't really a duality though, an illusion is real, it's just that it isn't as it appears but it is still real, it's really an illusion.

[SOUL]

21 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

SOUL — What do you think Leo was trying to communicate in the Dream Video, assuming you watched it?  I’ll watch it again now and see if my ideas change about it.

I didn't watch it and it doesn't require me to watch it to know it's just him expounding upon an old concept, though I'm sure some may get value from it.

[snowleopard]

@SOUL  Again, some may have a different subjective interpretation of the video. I just take from it what I find useful, and let the rest go. I've really not much interest in arguing which subjective interpretation is 'right', nor in any us-vs-them duality.

[Joseph Maynor]

23 minutes ago, SOUL said:

I didn't watch it and it doesn't require me to watch it to know it's just him expounding upon an old concept, though I'm sure some may get value from it.

It’s too dogmatic in tone and tenor in my opinion.  That’s the main problem with it.   One is left wondering what to make of it.  But sometimes art has no point, especially 20th century art.  The point is not to make a point.  It’s like Baudrillard in Philosophy.  Check out some of his writings.  Some of that sh*t is really good — because the intent is to challenge paradigms.  The Frank Zappa personalities among us basically.  That attitude runs from Nietzche on through to today through the conduit of Postmodernism as we are led to term it.  But we are too wise today to get hung up on things that tied up previous generations.  Knowledge and intelligence do advance in the evolving culture we swim around in.

Edited February 14, 2018 by Joseph Maynor

[SOUL]

1 hour ago, snowleopard said:

@SOUL  Again, some may have a different subjective interpretation of the video. I just take from it what I find useful, and let the rest go. I've really not much interest in arguing which subjective interpretation is 'right', nor in any us-vs-them duality.

I'm not talking about the video, I also don't claim to be 'right', which is a dualism concept as well. My perspective which is cultivated through my own subjective experience allows me to transcend the duality in those concepts without necessarily dismissing them as useless.

Edited February 14, 2018 by SOUL

[SOUL]

1 hour ago, Joseph Maynor said:

It’s too dogmatic in tone and tenor in my opinion.  That’s the main problem with it.   One is left wondering what to make of it.  But sometimes art has no point, especially 20th century art.  The point is to not make a point.  This is like Baudrillard in Philosophy.  Check out some of his writings.  Some of that sh*t is really good — because the intent is to challenge paradigms.  The Frank Zappa personalities among us basically.  

It's a challenge to communicate personal subjective experience to others without having a dogmatic aspect to it. Our experience as it unfolds is a spontaneous event and the revelation in that is authentic but when we tell others of it it turns into conceptualization by the very nature of the act.

Not that the conceptualization is inherently a negative or less awakened but since everbody's experience is so individualized and divergent the teaching of our own direct experience can be dogmatic. Especially if we take a tone of authoritative knowledge which can happen in the zeal of expressing it to others.

Edited February 14, 2018 by SOUL

[snowleopard]

53 minutes ago, SOUL said:

allows me to transcend the duality

That is what is paramount ... If a teaching, a metaphysics, an allegory, or whatever, serves that function, then what does it matter any other opinion about it. It could be that when there is still some exclusive self-identity attached to it, as 'the authority who knows the truth', it can become dogmatic. But there's no longer much inclination to be someone who gets hung up or upset about that. Presumably it'll play itself out.

[Joseph Maynor]

8 minutes ago, snowleopard said:

That is what is paramount ... If a teaching, a metaphysics, an allegory, or whatever, serves that function, then what does it matter any other opinion about it. It could be that when there is still some exclusive self-identity attached to it, as 'the authority who knows the truth', it can become dogmatic. But there's no longer much inclination to be someone who gets hung up or upset about that. Presumably it'll play itself out.

Beliefs will become much less important to you when you transcend Ego.  They will lose their allure to you, like an older man losing his youthful lust.  Beliefs once looked so important, so attractive, so pure, so natural.  Now, you see through that issue like a 70 year old man sees through a teenage relationship.  Beliefs are not what’s important.  What’s important is detaching from beliefs, detaching from clinging to an Ego of beliefs, or a self-preserving system of assumptions about reality.

Edited February 14, 2018 by Joseph Maynor

[MarinM]

Yo im getting back on topic. I had lsd experience where there was a gap bettween me and floor, there was additional layer. I was confused since i was expecting oneness and that was wierd. I contemplated about non duality and is life is a dream and i had some really shaky ego experiences. Weeks after going through contemplation leo put out a video and i was high on cannabis and could easy go with what he says. Then I "realized" that the gap was nothingness. Still no sure if its true experience but Im open towards deeper experience of it. It can be easy to trick yourslef into believing that but the only thing you can do is open yourself to a possibility that it can be true.

[SOUL]

20 minutes ago, snowleopard said:

That is what is paramount ... If a teaching, a metaphysics, an allegory, or whatever, serves that function, then what does it matter any other opinion about it. It could be that when there is still some exclusive self-identity attached to it, as 'the authority who knows the truth', it can become dogmatic. But there's no longer much inclination to be someone who gets hung up or upset about that. Presumably it'll play itself out.

It's almost insidious the way the mind will continue to frame everything as a duality. It is a misperception of the mind but one that served it well so doesn't relinquish the habit easily.

Which is evident in the way even non-duality is unconsciously framed as an opposite of duality. This is why I place considerable attention in brining to awareness the hallmarks of how it is expressed.

Although, I don't put too much importance on a concept to replace it otherwise the mind may try to contrast that in dualism as well with a right and wrong or good and bad dochotomy.