Solipsism is NOT true

[Gili Trawangan]

I can't believe I'm seeing supposedly highly conscious people around here arguing for solipsism. I don't care how many psychedelics you've taken or how enlightened you think you are. If you believe solipsism is true, then either:

1. You don't know what solipsism is; OR

2. You're deluded.

Rupert Spira has talked about this before, he has refuted solipsism as nonsense. It may be that there is only one giant mind (aka God), but that does NOT mean solipsism. Solipsism is the belief that your FINITE mind is the ONLY mind existing and everyone else is a bunch of puppets with no mind or experience of their own, only illusions. Kind of like the Truman Show, your ego is the only ego around and everyone else only seems to exist to provide with that illusion. Simply not true.

[Shadowraix]

"There is absolute truth and relative truth, beware of half truths" - The Kyballion

 

[Gili Trawangan]

10 minutes ago, Shadowraix said:

"There is absolute truth and relative truth, beware of half truths" - The Kyballion

 

@Shadowraix Honestly I didn't get it, too cryptic for me

[Shadowraix]

3 minutes ago, Gili Trawangan said:

@Shadowraix Honestly I didn't get it, too cryptic for me

Basically Solipsism is a half truth. It's idea is not entirely incorrect but not entirely correct either. In the same way atheism and theism are half truths themselves and so on. 

The meaning of solipsism here should change away from referring to the ego self - that's just the integration taking place. 

 

[Leo Gura]

What's true is that you are God, God is all alone, and God is imagining everything.

Oneness cannot help being solipsistic. It is ONE! Not two.

But of course one includes two and all the rest. So in this sense it's not the standard Wikipedia version of solipsism. It's actually way more radical and insane.

Absolute Truth feels very solipsistic. Because it is you! And there exists nothing but you.

[Enlightenment]

Solipsism is unfalsifiable.

[Leo Gura]

7 minutes ago, Enlightenment said:

Solipsism is unfalsifiable.

Truth is unfalsifiable.

Don't forget that

[Gili Trawangan]

34 minutes ago, Shiva said:

@Gili Trawangan I don't want to argue for or against solipsism, but how do you know it is not true? What method did you use to prove it false?

Like someone said above, it is unfalsifiable. Which doesn't make it true. Are you using this line of questioning for everything anybody ever says? All you have is your own experience. It just so happens that I have mine as well. And that's how we're exchanging messages with each other on this forum.

Are you an unexisting bot? Are you an illusion here just for MY benefit? This, MY EGO'S benefit? Didn't think so...

Solipsism is simplistic and silly.

[Leo Gura]

16 minutes ago, Gili Trawangan said:

Are you an unexisting bot? Are you an illusion here just for MY benefit? This, MY EGO'S benefit? Didn't think so...

Notice, the final arbiter of that is you. It is actually you who is decided if he is a bot. If solipsism is true, then you are the only thing in existence, and you call all the shots. So the only one who determines whether he is a bot or not is you. So if you tell yourself, "He isn't a bot", that's what becomes true for you.

Whatever you imagine is true, is what is true for you. Since you are God imagining the whole world. If you believe this world is real and not imagined by you, that's you imagining that you aren't imagining it, therefore making it real for you. If you stop believing this world is real, it will stop being real.

The problem is this: because you have a dogmatic position that solipsism cannot possibly be true, you do not realize your own fully authority as the creator of reality. You have literally cut yourself off from your own authority, projecting this authority onto an imagination "other" or "world". And of course that is precisely how you create yourself as this limited human puppet. You have actually managed to convince yourself that there is an external world with physical laws which were not created by you. But the truth is, you created the whole world and then cut yourself off from the fact that you created it. And thus a human being was born. You were not born as some biological creature. You simply imagined your parents and hallucinated a life backstory for yourself. In truth, you were never born. You just tell yourself you were.

So right now you are imagining that solipsism cannot be true and I'm full of shit. And so that is what becomes true for you.

All of your childhood memories are things you're imagining RIGHT NOW! They only seem to have happened because you think so. And so that becomes true for you.

Ta-da!

Those are the true mechanics of reality. There never was a physical world at all. Nor was there a human self. Nor are there other people. It is ALL YOU! All by yourself playing this twisted game of infinite imagination.

Neat, huh?

[tsuki]

Solipsism is true or false depending on the context you're putting it in.
For the Godhead, the solipsism of personal self is false.
For the personal self, the solipsism of the Godhead is false.
In the Absolute, there is no separation and falsehood, precisely because it is unfalsifiable.

[Shadowraix]

We must be careful when it comes to meanings behind word. As well as to not be too rigid about what a word means. A word that has a common definition may not be accurate when considering the absolute, so it is changed. For example the common notion of God as a deity has some true and false notions. By discovering oneness with God we discovered the false notions, which was especially God being some kind of separate entity. Should we hold onto the formerly held definition of God for the sake of clinging onto what we want it to mean? Many would say no. Meanings and words dramatically morph and change with insight. We use some of the closest approximation words, modify them to point to it instead of half-truths.

Solipsism takes on this exact modification when realizing the 'self' was an illusion and the only 'self' there is is God. Which is all that exists. Instead of clinging onto what you want the word to mean for other people, find out and discover what they mean. Dictionary definitions are useful, but they can easily become a limitation.

Edited June 13, 2019 by Shadowraix

[eskwire]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

What's true is that you are God, God is all alone, and God is imagining everything.

Oneness cannot help being solipsistic. It is ONE! Not two.

But of course one includes two and all the rest. So in this sense it's not the standard Wikipedia version of solipsism. It's actually way more radical and insane.

Absolute Truth feels very solipsistic. Because it is you! And there exists nothing but you.

Why is oneness way more radical and insane? What's with the drama? 

[Shadowraix]

2 minutes ago, eskwire said:

Why is oneness way more radical and insane? What's with the drama? 

It veers very far off from the average human condition. There's a lot of implications to this that can be too much for a lot of people. Its why we can't just realize it all at once. 

[eskwire]

25 minutes ago, Shadowraix said:

It veers very far off from the average human condition. There's a lot of implications to this that can be too much for a lot of people. Its why we can't just realize it all at once. 

Asking @Leo Gura. Many of us on the forum have had enlightenment experiences - experiences of oneness, being alone, being one with god, even solipsism - so why the sudden drama about this? 

 

If this is truly a big breakthrough for him, I would be interested to see if this elevates his compassion level any or makes it worse. 

Edited June 13, 2019 by eskwire

[Leo Gura]

31 minutes ago, eskwire said:

Asking @Leo Gura. Many of us on the forum have had enlightenment experiences - experiences of oneness, being alone, being one with god, even solipsism - so why the sudden drama about this?

1) You haven't seen the full depth of it. Not even close.

2) People need to understand how radical this work is. Otherwise they are deceived. It's important to properly communicate how it FEELS from the subjective POV of the ordinary human. To play it off cool is just dishonest. It is incredibly radical. And it is dramatic. It is not a walk in the park to realize God. So let's not pretend it is.

[Inliytened1]

@Gili Trawangan its true from the Solipsism perspective.  

This is the raw power and magic of realty.  You have no idea yet 

Edited June 13, 2019 by Inliytened1

[eskwire]

5 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

1) You haven't seen the full depth of it. Not even close.

2) People need to understand how radical this work is. Otherwise they are deceived. It's important to properly communicate how it FEELS from the subjective POV of the ordinary human. To play it off cool is just dishonest. It is incredibly radical. And it is dramatic. It is not a walk in the park to realize God. So let's not pretend it is.

"You don't know what I know, you haven't seen what I've seen. Justification for making a circus of what many more humble people have come to feel and rejecting the teachings of others."

It's ok to experience what other people already experienced and wrote down in books and Wikipedia. That's not playing it cool. It's part of the human experience. Attaching to being the MOST and the FIRST and the DEEPEST SO DEEP - this is delusion and intoxication. 

But whatever, do you. Guess you have to. You're all there is.

[Gili Trawangan]

1 hour ago, Shadowraix said:

We must be careful when it comes to meanings behind word. As well as to not be too rigid about what a word means. A word that has a common definition may not be accurate when considering the absolute, so it is changed. For example the common notion of God as a deity has some true and false notions. By discovering oneness with God we discovered the false notions, which was especially God being some kind of separate entity. Should we hold onto the formerly held definition of God for the sake of clinging onto what we want it to mean? Many would say no. Meanings and words dramatically morph and change with insight. We use some of the closest approximation words, modify them to point to it instead of half-truths.

Solipsism takes on this exact modification when realizing the 'self' was an illusion and the only 'self' there is is God. Which is all that exists. Instead of clinging onto what you want the word to mean for other people, find out and discover what they mean. Dictionary definitions are useful, but they can easily become a limitation.

@Shadowraix Yes, I believe this is what's happening. I took the original sense of the word, where it is ego-based. As in, there is only this experience, there is only this ego, everything else is illusion.

I get from @Leo Gura 's answer that what he means by solipsism is that there is, from an absolute perspective, only one mind. This changes the original meaning of solipsism, though, and I think it's good to make that distinction. In fact, I wouldn't use that word at all, but hey that's just me... maybe it is the most fitting word for someone who has experienced it.

It is a mindblowing notion that has made my ego spin for the last few hours. I'll have to "see" it for myself somehow...

[Umar_uk]

2 hours ago, Enlightenment said:

Solipsism is unfalsifiable.

Solipsism is a conceptual idea like everything else imagined. It's also a belief.  

 

The Self in which ideas and beliefs are born is unborn, only the unborn can be born. So the SELF is irrefutable, immutable.

 

 

Solipsism in Philosophy... is the theory that only the self exists, or can be proved to exist.

extreme preoccupation with and indulgence of one's feelings, desires, etc.; egoistic self-absorption.

 

But non-duality is not a theory.

 

Now look at what Rupert Spira says...

“The tragedy and comedy of the human condition is that we spend most of our lives thinking, feeling, acting, perceiving and relating  on behalf of a non-existent self.”

 

So the irony is..there is a SELF but it belongs to no one. 

It is only your imagination that insists that you are the mind, it's memories, its personality, and the physical body that contains it. But these are merely attributes you perceive. Your true self is beyond any scope of possible perception,you are the awareness in which all perceptions appear.

 

Only the Unborn can be Born.

 

Y ( our ) true nature — Empty Awareness.

Despite the innumerable names that are tagged on to it, 
 

 

"Nonexistence is eagerly bubbling in the expectation of being given existence....For the mine and treasure-house of God's making is naught but nonexistence coming into manifestation." ~Rumi

 

''Buddha tells us that, "There is an Unborn, Unoriginated, Uncreated, Unformed. If there were not this Unborn, this Unoriginated, this Uncreated, this Unformed, escape from the world of the born, the originated, the created, the formed would not be possible." But there is this essential ground, and it is possible to "escape" spacetime, according to Buddha.''

 

 

[whoareyou]

55 minutes ago, eskwire said:

"You don't know what I know, you haven't seen what I've seen. Justification for making a circus of what many more humble people have come to feel and rejecting the teachings of others."

It's ok to experience what other people already experienced and wrote down in books and Wikipedia. That's not playing it cool. It's part of the human experience. Attaching to being the MOST and the FIRST and the DEEPEST SO DEEP - this is delusion and intoxication. 

But whatever, do you. Guess you have to. You're all there is.

I would agree with this, as I noticed some of this. It seems like the ego likes to hi-jack experiences and then likes to talk about how deep, etc it went and how it's the special one(like nobody ever experienced this before, etc). Happens especially with people who take psychedelics.

You see, for the EGO, it's very radical and crazy, but for GOD - it is the norm. When you integrate the things and become more GODlike - it will be something that is normal and you won't have any need to talk about how "crazy" it was, etc. 

Martin Ball talks about it in his book as well. At some point I think LEO will come to realize this