external reality...?

[Identity]

I am rather confused about this whole idea of there being an external objective reality or not.

When I watch Leo's video's about it makes quite some sense to me. Also, my base experience has shifted a lot and I can focus my mind to the understanding that this experience is not really happening anywhere. In meditative or psychedelic states I can grasp it quite clearly.

However, when I try to think about it in practical situations or try to engage a friend in a conversation about this I get confused very quickly. What does it mean that there is no external reality? Are things not happening to certain mechanisms, IS reality not in some kind of way? It kind of must be because its here right, forms are happening? Are all these things that are happening the same for everyone? There is a consensus on things that people see/experience to some degree and scientific research can lead to accurate predictions, so in a sense that leads to truth and understanding... right? What then really is a fact or understanding? What is then really wrong with the logical positivist movement, if you can get those basic facts right and build from there you will get an accurate model, no? Or are these basic facts than to some degree different for different perspectives? Is there an overlap in human experience, but also a difference?

Should I even strive for a clear conceptual model, or is that the trap itself? Is confusion a more desirable state?

In this confused state it sure seems easier to access mystical states...

 

[ivankiss]

@Identity Evidence is limiting. It is partial rather that all-inclusive.

The external world = the internal world. And wise-versa. Quite literally so. 

Nothing is true and everything is true simultaneously. Trying to grasp this causes confusion and extreme contradictions.

Ultimately, there is no such thing as "objectivity". There is only direct experience, which is completely subjective in it's nature. Always and forever.

You only ever interact with yourself    

[ajasatya]

22 minutes ago, Identity said:

Should I even strive for a clear conceptual model, or is that the trap itself?

it's a trap. living in awe is the only option. it's an unsolvable mystery.

[luckieluuke]

I´d say that treating reality as material works great. It enables you to do fantastic stuff, like going to the moon and creating the internet.
The problem is that we get caught up in this material game and think everything is just material, including us. Then we try to find happiness in the external material objects or ideas of future and past. 
There is nothing wrong with using a material perspective IF you know that it cannot effect your since you are the eternal awareness.
We have made incredible scientific discoveries but since we dont know our true self we use them like we were kids.
If we want to be at peace and "happy" and build a better society materialism is not the answer. We will need to mature in spirit.

[Nahm]

@Identity If there wasn’t a you, would there still ‘be’ opposites like external & internal? What is there without you categorizing it?

[luckieluuke]

11 minutes ago, ajasatya said:

it's a trap. living in awe is the only option. it's an unsolvable mystery.

Id say, ditch the conceptual models completely. Do the practice and the answers will flow effortlessly

[Shin]

Forget everything you think you know.

You must become as clueless as a newborn.

 

[Strikr]

9 minutes ago, Shin said:

Forget everything you think you know.

You must become as clueless as a newborn.

 

then you'll be fresh and beautiful

[Identity]

Thanks guys, definitely some insights.

However, this clueless confusion state does not exactly help me write my master thesis 

How does someone like leo balance this state of not knowing with a tremendously detailed map of reality?

[Shin]

2 hours ago, Identity said:

Thanks guys, definitely some insights.

However, this clueless confusion state does not exactly help me write my master thesis 

How does someone like leo balance this state of not knowing with a tremendously detailed map of reality?

You want to write a master thesis on non duality ?

That's ballzy ?

Edited November 23, 2018 by Shin

[Identity]

@Shin no I'm not writing it on non-duality 

However, this idea of not "just letting all conceptualizations go" won't really fly here.

I understand that reaching this state of no mind is where you want to operate from mainly.

But in everyday life shit still needs to get done right? Can't exactly tell my supervisor I just want to let go of my conceptualizations and hand in a blank sheet of paper. Won't really work too well in a business setting either..

[luckieluuke]

"Before Enlightenment chop wood, carry water. After enlightenment chop wood, carry water”

 

There. That should clear things up?! ;-)

Edited November 23, 2018 by luckieluuke

[ground]

3 hours ago, Identity said:

I am rather confused about this whole idea of there being an external objective reality or not.

Why? I'd say there is an external objective reality if someone asked me. However since this reality is ultimately not accessible all one can do is to work with the appearing circumstances but stop imputing truth to mere appearances.

Edited November 23, 2018 by ground

[who chit]

20 hours ago, Shin said:

How does someone like leo balance this state of not knowing with a tremendously detailed map of reality?

Wake up to what is true reality,then one plays the game all the while knowing, it's just a game.
The map is just a map. True Reality,has no map.

Edited November 24, 2018 by who chit

[Shin]

2 hours ago, who chit said:

Wake up to what is true reality,then one plays the game all the while knowing, it's just a game.
The map is just a map. True Reality,has no map.

[ground]

23 hours ago, Identity said:

How does someone like leo balance this state of not knowing with a tremendously detailed map of reality?

The point is not balancing but integrating. Balancing may lead to confusion and conflict. Integrating levels out merely apparent contradictions.

Based on the non-truth of all conceptual views /ideas it is only about whether ideas are helpful for the attainment of certain goals or not helpful or even counterproductive.

Given a specific goal what ideas are helpful however depends on the individual and cannot be generally said. What Leo finds helpful may not be helpful or even counterproductive for some individuals. The starting point of every individual is unique and so are potentially helpful ideas.

[who chit]

50 minutes ago, Shin said:

[Shin]

??

[Leo Gura]

On 11/23/2018 at 3:27 AM, Identity said:

What is then really wrong with the logical positivist movement, if you can get those basic facts right and build from there you will get an accurate model, no? Or are these basic facts than to some degree different for different perspectives?

There are no "basic facts". That assumes an objective external reality, which is a concept, not a fact. All forms and facts are relative. At the very least logical positivism is relative to you being human. A mule knows nothing of logical positivism and it is not true for him.

Logical positivism was disproven long ago. Logical positivism is self-contradictory because it itself is not an emprical fact but a metaphysical belief.

You can create models, but all of them will end in paradox and contradiction. None of them will explain reality as a whole because it is impossible for a model to do so.

The linear mind cannot unfurl all of reality in a linear way. Because the linear mind is finite but reality is infinite. Reality is not collection of causes and effects, as science likes to assume.

You are confused because the mind is trying to do the impossible: linearly rationalize reality.

The ultimate solution is to realize that this is impossible, and to instead transcend the mind through spiritual practices like Kriya yoga.