how to disprove solipsism ?

[Jacobsrw]

1 hour ago, Nak Khid said:

would Spira agree with this statement "everything is imaginary" ?

Yes. He asserts that consciousness is the primacy from which all arises and all that arises is but merely a temporary activity of mind.

[Jacobsrw]

11 minutes ago, Javfly33 said:

I watched that, but never convinced me.

I'm still considering solipsism, if not accurately, to be a very close thing to what the Truth is

They aren’t the same. The difference is that solipsism presumes an existence made up of one mind experienced by a single ego. Where non-duality presumes existence is impersonal but experienced through a multiplicity of minds. Solipsism doesn’t allow for the expression of mind to be expressed different to itself. Where Non-duality accounts for the multiplicity of minds that inevitably arise from it in varying expressions.

Edited May 28, 2020 by Jacobsrw

[Someone here]

21 minutes ago, Jacobsrw said:

They aren’t the same. The difference is that solipsism presumes an existence made up of one mind experienced by a single ego. Where non-duality presumes existence is impersonal but experienced through a multiplicity of minds. Solipsism doesn’t allow for the expression of mind to be expressed different to itself. Where Non-duality accounts for the multiplicity of minds that inevitably arise from it in varying expressions.

I mean really if you keep going with this line of reasoning you will arrive at solipsism.  These other minds all have one essence so it's like an imaginary separation. It's like a bunch of separate cameras but they all display at the end in one giant screen.  What you are saying means even if there is other minds they are still you.  The same thing in a slightly different perspective. Both lead to "there is only you". However you define that "you ".  I can't see the difference between nonduality and solipsism. 

[Jacobsrw]

12 minutes ago, Someone here said:

I mean really if you keep going with this line of reasoning you will arrive at solipsism.  These other minds all have one essence so it's like an imaginary separation. It's like a bunch of separate cameras but they all display at the end in one giant screen.  What you are saying means even if there is other minds they are still you.  The same thing in a slightly different perspective. Both lead to "there is only you". However you define that "you ".  I can't see the difference between nonduality and solipsism. 

No they are still quite different. Solipsism is predicated on an I, me, an ego self. Non-duality is predicated on consciousness, an infinite impersonal field. The main difference is this, solipsism claims perspectives are only one dimensional.  Where non-duality states consciousness is multidimensional, expressed through many different perspectives (infinity). Infinity doesn’t exist for the solipsist.

When there is no ego self there is no solipsism. Consciousness remains irrespective of an ego self.

I feel you may be confusing Mind with Consciousness. Mind is the activity of consciousness.

Edited May 28, 2020 by Jacobsrw

[Someone here]

10 minutes ago, Jacobsrw said:

No they are still quite different. Solipsism is predicated on an I, me, an ego self. Non-duality is predicated on consciousness, an infinite impersonal field. The main difference is this, solipsism claims perspectives are only one dimensional.  Where non-duality states consciousness is multidimensional, expressed through many different perspectives (infinity). Infinity doesn’t exist for the solipsist.

When there is no ego self there is no solipsism. Consciousness remains irrespective of an ego self.

But that brings us back to the question "is there other minds than me"?  From this reply you seem to be saying "yes" but the additional thing is that these other minds are ultimately just you!,. So what difference did you "really" add? 

And how can I validate that in my direct experience?It doesn't allow me to validate or invalidate that. In my direct experience there is only ever my own mind. I feel like we are running in circles.  

Your last statement doesn't disprove solipsism it just negates the ego which means you exist as pure awareness disassociated from your persona but that gets you stuck deeper inward. 

Edited May 28, 2020 by Someone here

[Jacobsrw]

12 minutes ago, Someone here said:

But that brings us back to the question "is there other minds than me"?  From this reply you seem to be saying "yes" but the additional thing is that these other minds are ultimately just you!,. So what difference did you "really" add? 

And how can I validate that in my direct experience?It doesn't allow me to validate or invalidate that. In my direct experience there is only ever my own mind. I feel like we are running in circles.  

Your last statement doesn't disprove solipsism it just negates the ego which means you exist as pure awareness disassociated from your persona but that gets you stuck deeper inward. 

Precisely the point. If you collapse the ego, the “I”, solipsism ceases to exist. That’s the difference. Solipsism requires a mind to exists where consciousness does not. If “I” dissolves for a solipsist so does their reality. If “l”dissolves for consciousness it remains pure and untainted, it remains as reality itself.

See the major difference here?

Sollipsim is codependent. Consciousness is independent.

This difference can be observed once your ego dissolves there won’t be are you left to contend with.

You seem to be stuck in concepts.

 

Edited May 28, 2020 by Jacobsrw

[Nak Khid]

Quote

Leo Gura

 solipsism is a conceptual scheme, a philosophical system. This is very different from actuality. In this sense solipsism is a fantasy whereas nonduality is actuality. Map vs territory. This is a HUGE difference. Don't underestimate this.

Secondly, solipsism is not even a good map. It does not recognize the truth of no-self and the truth that you are God. Solipsism is still dualistic in that it denies the reality of others by upholding the reality of the ego-self. Nonduality makes a more radical move. It denies the reality of all individual selves, especially oneself. If other people are unreal, you as a person must also be unreal.

If you are unreal, then what are you? Solipsism doesn't answer this ultimate question.

The part that solipsism gets right is that ultimately you are all alone. But what are you? You are not a finite being, as solipsism assumes. But when you finally realize that you are an infinite being, you will also realize that you are both alone and together, because infinity includes all dualities. You are so ONE that you cannot even distinguish oneness from twoness! Unless you do

 

 

[Someone here]

Just now, Jacobsrw said:

Precisely the point. If you collapse the ego, the I, solipsism ceases to exist. That’s the difference. Solipsism requires a mind to exists where consciousness does not not. If “I” dissolves for a solipsist so does their reality. If “l”dissolves for consciousness it remains pure and untainted.

See the major difference here?

Sollipsim codependent. Consciousness is independent.

This difference can be observed once your ego dissolves there won’t be are you left to contend with.

 

But how does that solve the original question..?  

Let's take it step by step. 

The question :   is  there any other "mind" "ego" "aware human"....Whatever you wanna call it other than "me "? 

And you in this thread are giving me two contradictory answers :

The first   :yes there is but they are ultimately still you. 

The second    : there isn't even a "me". All there is pure awareness and a thought of "me" appearing inside it. 

The first answer is just solipsism and you didn't add anything.  And the second one didn't address the actual problem and just negated the ego to kill the question altogether. 

 

[Jacobsrw]

13 minutes ago, Someone here said:

But how does that solve the original question..?  

Let's take it step by step. 

The question :   is  there any other "mind" "ego" "aware human"....Whatever you wanna call it other than "me "? 

And you in this thread are giving me two contradictory answers :

The first   :yes there is but they are ultimately still you. 

The second    : there isn't even a "me". All there is pure awareness and a thought of "me" appearing inside it. 

The first answer is just solipsism and you didn't add anything.  And the second one didn't address the actual problem and just negated the ego to kill the question altogether. 

 

There is no contradiction. It’s a problem of context.

Do you not see the delusion of solipsism in your above statement? 

If all self’s are expressed through consciousness but then ultimately collapse as one, how can solipsism exist? There’s no self left to create its solipsistic reality.

From a relative finite perspective, solipsism seems correct, from an ultimate perspective it is completely delusional.

Solipsism is completely dependent on a seperate mind. The mind disappears into consciousness once it realises it’s ultimate nature. 

No self = no solipsism = consciousness.

Have a mystical experience and you will see the fabrication of solipsism.

Edited May 28, 2020 by Jacobsrw

[Someone here]

8 minutes ago, Jacobsrw said:

There is no contradiction. It’s a problem of context.

Do you not see the delusion of solipsism in the above statement? 

If all self’s are expressed through consciousness but then collapse as ultimately one, how can solipsism exist?

From a relative finite perspective, solipsism seems correct, from an ultimate perspective it is completely delusional.

Solipsism is completely dependent on a seperate mind. The mind disappears into consciousness once it realises it’s ultimate nature. 

No self = no solipsism = consciousness.

I really appreciate your contribution and your thoughtful replies.  But I think what you are providing in this thread will ultimately just arrive at solipsism no matter how you slice it.   Don't get caught up in the term "solipsism". Any concept is just a concept but that's not the issue here.  Your ultimate perspective that you talk about is just a more complicated and nuanced version of solipsism.  It's like there is only me and I imagined myself separated but ultimately all the separate minds are in essence just me.  How can you not see its just a different road  that  leads to the same destination? 

Edited May 28, 2020 by Someone here

[Jacobsrw]

2 hours ago, Someone here said:

I really appreciate your contribution and your thoughtful replies.  But I think what you are providing in this thread will ultimately just arrive at solipsism no matter how you slice it.   Don't get caught up in the term "solipsism". Any concept is just a concept but that's not the issue here.  Your ultimate perspective that you talk about is just a more complicated and nuanced version of solipsism.  It's like there is only me and I imagined myself separated but ultimately all the separate minds are in essence just me.  How can you not see its just a different road  that  leads to the same destination? 

Dude, it’s completely different don’t you see? 

Just because solipsism asserts one mind doesn’t mean it is synonymous with consciousness. This one mind relies on a personal self. There is no self in consciousness. When the “me” stops existing all realities from which a self creates do as well, this includes solipsism. No self, no solipsism. It’s very simple.

“Me” is a concept that doesn’t exist for consciousness, it has no personification. Really we shouldn’t use it when referring to consciousness it causes confusion.

I’ll leave it there I feel we are on two different band widths here.

Appreciate your contributions.

Edited May 29, 2020 by Jacobsrw

[Nak Khid]

If you say "everything"  and you follow with  "Is" and follow by any other word, that word becomes meaningless, such as "everything is imaginary". 
"Imaginary" only has meaning if reality also exists.
If you say nothing is real that means nothing is real. It doesn't mean therefore "imaginary" exists. It just means "real" is a meaningless word as well as "imaginary" ( unless some things are really are real but we just don't have the ability to be sure) 

Edited May 29, 2020 by Nak Khid

[Nak Khid]

1 hour ago, Jacobsrw said:

all that arises is but merely a temporary activity of mind.

that's solipsism

[Nak Khid]

12 minutes ago, Jacobsrw said:

Dude, it’s completely different don’t you see? 

Just because solipsism asserts one mind doesn’t mean it is synonymous with consciousness. This one mind relies on a personal self. There is no self in consciousness. When the “me” stops existing all realities from which a self creates do as well, this includes solipsism. No self, no solipsism. It’s very different.

“Me” is a concept that doesn’t exist for consciousness, it has no personification. Really we shouldn’t use it when referring to consciousness it causes confusion.

I’ll leave it there I feel we are on two different band widths here.

Appreciate your contributions.

The idea that  "consciousness" is something other than a state of awareness in a living being with a brain, some kind of living awareness or substance of the entire universe  is a religious belief 

[Jacobsrw]

16 minutes ago, Nak Khid said:

If you say "everything"  and you follow with  "Is" and follow by any other word, that word becomes meaningless, such as "everything is imaginary". 
"Imaginary" only has meaning if reality also exists.
If you say nothing is real that means nothing is real. It doesn't mean therefore "imaginary" exists. It just means "real" is a meaningless word as well as "imaginary" ( unless some things are really are real put we just don't have the ability to be sure) 

Exactly. However, just because something is imaginary doesn’t mean it has no reality to it. It’s just not an ultimate realty. Eg. A wave cannot explain the ocean but it is still made up of it.

Edited May 29, 2020 by Jacobsrw

[Jacobsrw]

29 minutes ago, Nak Khid said:

that's solipsism

Yep. But where does solipsism exist? A mind. The mind collapses when consciousness is realised. As there remains no mind for activity to occur.

Solipsim believes in its own reality, not an ultimate reality. Just like the movie on the screen. The movie character believes it’s own reality is what it perceives but ignores the screen from which displays it. The screen is consciousness and solipsism is nothing but a movie playing on it.

Edited May 29, 2020 by Jacobsrw

[Jacobsrw]

Found this kinda funny 

Edited May 29, 2020 by Jacobsrw

[Nahm]

2 hours ago, Javfly33 said:

I'm still considering solipsism, if not accurately, to be a very close thing to what the Truth is

Truth is not a belief. That’s like saying the thought of going to Mars is accurately a very close thing to actUALLY GOING TO MARS!

 

@Jacobsrw ?

[Nak Khid]

7 minutes ago, Nahm said:

Truth is not a belief. That’s like saying the thought of going to Mars is accurately a very close thing to actUALLY GOING TO MARS!

 

@Jacobsrw ?

Truth and actuality are both beliefs

[Nak Khid]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solipsism_syndrome#cite_note-Angelo1-1

 

Solipsism syndrome

Solipsism syndrome refers to a psychological state in which a person feels that reality is not external to his or her mind. Periods of extended isolation may predispose people to this condition. In particular, the syndrome has been identified as a potential concern for individuals living in outer space for extended periods of time