Difference between enlightenment solipsism & 'normie' solipsism

[Guru Fat Bastard]

13 minutes ago, Mason Riggle said:

beyond appearances? What does that mean?

Objects. Gross (physical) or subtle (mind).

[Breakingthewall]

2 hours ago, Gesundheit2 said:

Keep saying that for a few weeks, and Leo will probably dismiss you.

Leo denies that basic lesson in principle, but in practice he contradicts his principles, interacts with others, teaches them solipsism, and preaches morality onto them.

8 hours ago, Mason Riggle said:

@Breakingthewall 

really the position of leo is difficult to understand. I just watched half of the video, and I don't understand what he wants. So God can only perceive a single bubble. it is omnipotent except for that. and rather lazy, he does all sorts of tricks to be efficient and save effort.

I am sure there is some intention in putting forward this vision, but I cannot see it. Sounds to me like some kind of psychotic delusion. but I think it is possible that it induces some kind of awakening in some people. or a psychotic break. 

[Guru Fat Bastard]

 Truth, is not an "ism", ideology, philosophy, religion, belief system. Do you want Truth or a philosophy of Truth. If you want a philosophy of Truth, Take your pick, there's more than plenty to go around.

[aurum]

7 hours ago, Inliytened1 said:

which is why I don't even think the word should be used - even if we say Absolute Solipsism or Solipsism as God it serms to still confuse people

I’m with you on this.

Using “solipsism” as a term at all seems to be doing more harm than good. I’ve also had members reach out to me who were unnecessarily freaked out over “being alone”.

Part of the problem is that solipsism is already defined. And as its been defined in the past by philosophers, its extremely misleading and NOT absolute truth. “Solipsism” in that way essentially means “my ego is all that exists”. Lol.

So really, why are we still using that word at all? It’s not accurate and it’s just confusing people.

Of course, you could argue that people will find a way to confuse or dismiss Absolute Truth no matter what words we use. And that’s true. Absolute Truth can be mind-boggling or cause to ego to get defensive. It’s inevitable.

But still, if different language helps even just a bit, why not use it?

The only other option is to create hierarchical content for people to consume when they are ready. But that becomes extremely difficult. How can someone like Leo know who will be ready or who isn’t, and how can he make sure they only see the appropriate content for their level?

As I said in another thread, the beauty of the internet is that it has blown open spiritual teachings for anyone and everyone to easily consume. And the downside is the exact same.

[Ananta]

1 hour ago, aurum said:

Part of the problem is that solipsism is already defined. And as its been defined in the past by philosophers, its extremely misleading and NOT absolute truth. “Solipsism” in that way essentially means “my ego is all that exists”. Lol.

Exactly. Agreed ?, this has been my issue with it, but many want to argue the definition isn't the definition and under certain scenarios it can mean "absolute solipsism". No, you can't change the definition of a word to fit your narrative. It's a terrible pointer and just needs thrown out. Period.

Edited March 12, 2022 by Ananta

[VeganAwake]

There's just whatever seems to be happening, that's easy enough right?

It doesn't matter what it's called.

It's THIS!!

❤ 

 

[Gesundheit2]

11 hours ago, Mason Riggle said:

@Gesundheit2 beyond appearances? What does that mean?

If something isn't 'experienced' in some way it's not part of reality.  

Reality 'appears' to me. I might be mistaken about the nature of it, but I'm absolutely certain something SEEMS to be happening. 

It's obvious. Self evident. If anything's Real, it's the seeming. The rest, well, it seems real to me. 

This assumes a reality that hinges upon your perception.

But maybe there's an objective reality that has nothing to do with your perception. Maybe your perception is simply a distortion of that objective reality into the appearances you seem to experience.

[Gesundheit2]

8 hours ago, aurum said:

Part of the problem is that solipsism is already defined. And as its been defined in the past by philosophers, its extremely misleading and NOT absolute truth. “Solipsism” in that way essentially means “my ego is all that exists”. Lol.

So really, why are we still using that word at all? It’s not accurate and it’s just confusing people.

 

7 hours ago, Ananta said:

Exactly. Agreed ?, this has been my issue with it, but many want to argue the definition isn't the definition and under certain scenarios it can mean "absolute solipsism". No, you can't change the definition of a word to fit your narrative. It's a terrible pointer and just needs thrown out. Period.

Obviously you didn't see the solipsism video. I watched parts of it, so I'll tell you that he started out by bringing the definition of solipsism from Wikipedia and then arguing for it.

Leo doesn't claim that he's the most awake being because he agrees with the other teachers. Rather, he does that precisely because he disagrees with them and doesn't even think that they actually exist, nor any of us here. Leo thinks solipsism is the absolute truth, and for him that's what all awakening boils down to, hence we are all not really awake. But don't take my word for it. Ask him and see.

Edited March 12, 2022 by Gesundheit2

[Ananta]

4 hours ago, Gesundheit2 said:

 

Obviously you didn't see the solipsism video. I watched parts of it, so I'll tell you that he started out by bringing the definition of solipsism from Wikipedia and then arguing for it.

Leo doesn't claim that he's the most awake being because he agrees with the other teachers. Rather, he does that precisely because he disagrees with them and doesn't even think that they actually exist, nor any of us here. Leo thinks solipsism is the absolute truth, and for him that's what all awakening boils down to, hence we are all not really awake. But don't take my word for it. Ask him and see.

I listened to the video on audio. After ppl here were flipping out that there was a video of his taken down, then I searched for an audio version and it took a whole 5 minutes to find it online. 

Anyways, I just re-listened to the first bit and he does read the definition, then does go on to say he's talking about "absolute solipsism". Although he does then go on to say any current guru (ie, Rupert) isn't awake if they don't know this, etc. There seemed to be some mixing of the relative and infinite orders of reality. I'm not going to relisten to the whole thing for examples, but I recall thinking that the first time.

It's just not a good pointer, like I said. Starting off twisting a definition for a word to mean something it wasn't meant to mean, isn't good teaching, unfortunately. 
 

Edited March 12, 2022 by Ananta

[Zeroguy]

11 hours ago, VeganAwake said:

There's just whatever seems to be happening, that's easy enough right?

It doesn't matter what it's called.

It's THIS!!

❤ 

 

@Nahm left forum.Living for the day you will leave too .

[Ananta]

1 hour ago, Zeroguy said:

@Nahm left forum.Living for the day you will leave too .

I thought you liked Nahm? Sure seemed like you did.

Why so mean? @VeganAwakepost was clear and easy to understand.

Edited March 12, 2022 by Ananta

[Zeroguy]

10 minutes ago, Ananta said:

I thought you liked Nahm? Sure seemed like you did.

Why so mean? @VeganAwakepost was clear and easy to understand.

Yes I still like @Nahm.jJust tired of @VeganAwake neo advaita all the time.Every post the same.

[Carl-Richard]

2 hours ago, Zeroguy said:

Yes I still like @Nahm.jJust tired of @VeganAwake neo advaita all the time.Every post the same.

Please don't make Neo-Advaita into a naughty word. It's as fundamental as self-actualization.

[Nivsch]

On 11.3.2022 at 10:24 AM, nistake said:

I guess this whole solipsism issue boils down to what you identify with:

A) Relative domain/ego -> This can be a huge trap. Beliving that my separate self or POV is the only thing in existence and other people are just figments of my imagination. Actually a belief which has the power to drive you insane.

B) Absolute/God -> Well, this is the truth. Can't really be conceptualized and highly paradoxical. Nahm summarized it perfectly by saying "We're all alone together".

Like your intepretation. Much more makes sense. Much less dark.

Edited March 12, 2022 by Nivsch

[Nivsch]

On 11.3.2022 at 2:12 PM, Forza21 said:

Maybe, on the forum, there should be some explanation post ( the one Tim wrote is great!) attached? 

i think it could really solve 90% of solipsism misunderstanding and topics. Instead of closing it down, there should be more explanation done.  Especially about danger of sloppy language.

 

Thank you once again for help!  love!

But they dont want to explain.

Just to drop it on you and deal with that "you are alone".

It is a ego game. Building a bridge to make you understand is not their interest.

Edited March 12, 2022 by Nivsch

[aurum]

12 hours ago, Gesundheit2 said:

 

Obviously you didn't see the solipsism video. I watched parts of it, so I'll tell you that he started out by bringing the definition of solipsism from Wikipedia and then arguing for it.

Leo doesn't claim that he's the most awake being because he agrees with the other teachers. Rather, he does that precisely because he disagrees with them and doesn't even think that they actually exist, nor any of us here. Leo thinks solipsism is the absolute truth, and for him that's what all awakening boils down to, hence we are all not really awake. But don't take my word for it. Ask him and see.

No I didn’t watch it. I don’t know what Leo’s perspective on the wiki definition is. But I know I do not agree with it.

Of course you could still potentially use that word. No word will perfect. But the point is I feel it’s a generally ineffective pointer due to so many preconceived notions about “solipsism”.

In many ways I feel the same about the word “God”. Way too much baggage for most people. That’s why new agers had to rebrand “God” as “Source energy”. Is it the same thing? Of course it is. WE know that if we’re experienced. But the newbie does not. For the newbie, the word “God” is potentially very threatening, whereas “Source energy” has no prior associations.