Metaphysical Nature of Insight

[Scholar]

The Nature of All Insights, inculding all Concepts and Ideas you have heard from Leo is the following:

 

Insight is defined by the pathway, or difference, or contrast between Form and Nothingness.

This means that what kind of Insights about Reality you will have will depend on what kind of Form you are. There is a difference between the Form and Nothingness. Once you dissolve the Form, it will seem like the opposite of it's Nature is Truth.

For example:

Form is duality. Duality is dissolved. The Truth is Non-duaity.

Form is selfish. Selfishness is dissolved. The Truth is Selflessness.

Form is fear. Fear is dissolved. The Truth is Love.

Form is limitation. Limitation is dissolved. Truth is Infinity.

Form is dream. Dream is dissolved. Truth is Awakening.

Form is ignorance. Ignorance is dissolved. Truth is Intelligence.

 

 

All of these concept can only be arrived at through the journey, the distance between Form into Source. Something cannot be Limitless without Limitation. Something cannot be non-dual without duality. Something cannot be selfless without selfishness. Something cannot be awake if there is no dream. Something cannot be intelligent if there is no ignorance.

 

So insight is the moving towards the source. And that motion and it's nature will depend on the nature of the form.

 

 

See, Existence is not merely one thing, one Absolute. It is Impossibility. It is what it deems to be. And this is why Leo is chasing his own tail, blindly stumbling through the light. All of his teachings, are exploring his Form and it's motions. This is why he is so certain he has reached the "Absolute Truth", when that very sensation of having reached an end, having reached the Absolute, is merely one more form, one more limitation he is putting upon himself. Once that Limitation is lifted, Impossibility will be recognized. And then, there is no longer any teaching of the Truth, there is only the exploration and transmutation of Existence.

 

 

 

All of Human Spirituality is merely the Afterglow of the Dissolution of Humanity.

Edited September 26, 2022 by Scholar

[Leo Gura]

You keep belittling form. Notice that.

[amanen]

Form is literally formless, if you want to make some duality about it and say it is not, then of course you are not going to be understanding what Absolute Truth is because your worldview is dualistic and does not include form in it, so how can a truth that is not total and not include form be absolute? It cannot. But the actual Absolute Truth is absolute and everything is included in it.

[Scholar]

8 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

You keep belittling form. Notice that.

I am doing the opposite Leo.

 

14 minutes ago, amanen said:

Form is literally formless, if you want to make some duality about it and say it is not, then of course you are not going to be understanding what Absolute Truth is because your worldview is dualistic and does not include form in it, so how can a truth that is not total and not include form be absolute? It cannot. But the actual Absolute Truth is absolute and everything is included in it.

No, form is not formless. It is what it's deemed. That's it.

There is no actual Absolute Truth, there is only deeming. Having an Absolute Truth would Limit Deeming, and Deeming is Limitless, unless it i deemed otherwise.

Edited September 26, 2022 by Scholar

[Adamq8]

6 hours ago, Scholar said:

I am doing the opposite Leo.

 

No, form is not formless. It is what it's deemed. That's it.

There is no actual Absolute Truth, there is only deeming. Having an Absolute Truth would Limit Deeming, and Deeming is Limitless, unless it i deemed otherwise.

Is that an absolute statement?

The absolute truth is that there is no absolute truth? Thats the absolute truth then?

[Inliytened1]

37 minutes ago, Adamq8 said:

Is that an absolute statement?

The absolute truth is that there is no absolute truth? Thats the absolute truth then?

Nice catch.

[Scholar]

On 26.9.2022 at 6:13 PM, Adamq8 said:

The absolute truth is that there is no absolute truth? Thats the absolute truth then?

If it is deemed so.

 

On 26.9.2022 at 6:50 PM, Inliytened1 said:

Nice catch.

If you think it's a nice catch you cannot see Impossibility.

[RMQualtrough]

You don't even need to be in the frame at all, and then what is an insight but more random mirages?

I've actually wondered briefly, if we even are sentient or intelligent at all. I think I concluded we are but there was genuine grounds to question it. Since we are the ones judging what constitutes intelligence for one, but also because there is nothing to known knowledge but the appearance of that knowledge. I.e. nobody knowing the knowledge. The knowledge is appearing like everything is. So then IS that still intelligence if the knowledge (that we believe is "known" by the fictitious I entity we believe is more than simply more mirages of ideas and stories), is only smoke and mirrors?

That's something to ponder in the shower. I'm not certain of that answer.

[Danioover9000]

@Scholar

On 9/26/2022 at 0:57 AM, Scholar said:

The Nature of All Insights, inculding all Concepts and Ideas you have heard from Leo is the following:

 

Insight is defined by the pathway, or difference, or contrast between Form and Nothingness.

This means that what kind of Insights about Reality you will have will depend on what kind of Form you are. There is a difference between the Form and Nothingness. Once you dissolve the Form, it will seem like the opposite of it's Nature is Truth.

For example:

Form is duality. Duality is dissolved. The Truth is Non-duaity.

Form is selfish. Selfishness is dissolved. The Truth is Selflessness.

Form is fear. Fear is dissolved. The Truth is Love.

Form is limitation. Limitation is dissolved. Truth is Infinity.

Form is dream. Dream is dissolved. Truth is Awakening.

Form is ignorance. Ignorance is dissolved. Truth is Intelligence.

 

 

All of these concept can only be arrived at through the journey, the distance between Form into Source. Something cannot be Limitless without Limitation. Something cannot be non-dual without duality. Something cannot be selfless without selfishness. Something cannot be awake if there is no dream. Something cannot be intelligent if there is no ignorance.

 

So insight is the moving towards the source. And that motion and it's nature will depend on the nature of the form.

 

 

See, Existence is not merely one thing, one Absolute. It is Impossibility. It is what it deems to be. And this is why Leo is chasing his own tail, blindly stumbling through the light. All of his teachings, are exploring his Form and it's motions. This is why he is so certain he has reached the "Absolute Truth", when that very sensation of having reached an end, having reached the Absolute, is merely one more form, one more limitation he is putting upon himself. Once that Limitation is lifted, Impossibility will be recognized. And then, there is no longer any teaching of the Truth, there is only the exploration and transmutation of Existence.

 

 

 

All of Human Spirituality is merely the Afterglow of the Dissolution of Humanity.

   Insight defined by pathway, differences or contrasts between form and nothingness. However, this is not the original definition provided by Leo Gura, going by the actualized blog of what is insight. So, even if you assume Leo actually defines insight as the pathways/differences/contrasts between form and nothingness, and not based on the blogpost of insight by google, the question still becomes, what defines pathways, differences, contrasts, between, forms, and nothingness? Also, going forward, which definitions of those do and are you going to use for this discussion, because, how do you know which meaning am I or you or others use when talking about pathways, differences and contrasts that make up insights?

   What kinds of insights you will have, are based upon what stage of developmental values you hold, cognitive and moral development you are at, what major/minor personality traits and personas, or the 'you's in your mind are, the states of consciousness and beings you can be, the life experiences you have so far with places and people, and other lines of development, plus ideas/concepts/beliefs from your upbringing and family values and cultural and societal values from where you came from imprinted into your mind. All holistically coming together, to create and generate the kind of insights you have, from the insight that you can draw a circle, to the insight that you exist only, and others/the world is not real. The insights that make you go 'oh! I left my car keys and coffee on the table' to Eureka moments of world destruction. Those types of insights are dependent on your entire worldview and sense making apparatuses in your mind, and how it generalizes, distorts and deletes information that fits with its survival agendas and biases.

   The differences between form and nothingness, and dissolving the form = nothingness, is a simplification and assumption of what actual could happen if you dissolved form, because dissolution has stages that are observable, to stages that are not observable to one's perception, so when a form is dissolving, it doesn't go from form to formlessness, which is actually the correct binary opposite rather than this form/nothingness, the dissolving form becomes another form, another something, and not go to nothingness or formlessness directly quickly.

Addressing each example, first off that's an assumption that because you dissolve a form, that that causes truth as an effect of a form's destruction, for all 6 examples. Secondly:

Form is duality. Duality is dissolved. The Truth is non-duality. (Or that the truth is unity and not non-duality)

Form is selfish. Selfishness is dissolved. The Truth is Selflessness. (Or that the truth is non-selfishness. Another is that selfishness=bias, so destruction of bias causes a truth, that of un-bias.)  

Form is fear. Fear is dissolved. The Truth is Love. (Or that the truth is fearlessness, and not love, as love is not the true binary opposite of fear, fearlessness is.) 

Form is limitation. Limitation is dissolved. Truth is Infinity. (Or that the truth, after dissolution of limitation, is unlimitation, not infinity, because it's true opposite is finitude and not limitation.)

Form is dream. Dream is dissolved. Truth is Awakening. (Or that the truth, is a change in one's state of consciousness, one that was being inside a dream state after going sleepiness state, becoming slumber state, then deep sleep, then dream state, then transit into wakeful consciousness)

Form is ignorance. Ignorance is dissolved. Truth is Intelligence. (Or that dissolving of ignorance, leads to the truth of non-ignorance, or unbiased thing. and not intelligence. Why? Because ignorance is part of a surviving sentient being's mind, due to limited intelligence and physical/mental/emotional resources, must be selective in what and where it places attention into, as attention spent is calories spent maintaining focus and awareness into one limited are. This causes a large portion of your field of awareness to only show what's being placed attention into, so that your sense of self isn't overrun by the various objects and people around. Ignorance, then, is a function of the mind to safegaurd you from getting lost in the reeds, lost in the music or crowds and so forth.) 

   After reading and re-reading your entire post, it seems to me you have a love and hate relationship with @Leo Gura. Your talking points are very similar to Buddhism or traditional Advaita Vedanta, and Leo may have said something you simply can't nor won't agree with, due to his different method/approach to practicing spirituality. This entire post is, therefore, you vent your disagreement to Leo, which is fine, but you are being sneaking with how you complain about Leo, and not consider steelmanning his point of view, but rather attack him in an underhanded way with all this.

[Danioover9000]

   BTW, I have an artist bias, and bias for images, so what an insight is to me, is that it's pictures of varying degrees, small to big, mosaic and collage, that you make use of your sight capacities, whilst being inside, actual or imagined, the image you are having an insight into. That plus other main definitions of an insight.

[Adamq8]

3 hours ago, RMQualtrough said:

You don't even need to be in the frame at all, and then what is an insight but more random mirages?

I've actually wondered briefly, if we even are sentient or intelligent at all. I think I concluded we are but there was genuine grounds to question it. Since we are the ones judging what constitutes intelligence for one, but also because there is nothing to known knowledge but the appearance of that knowledge. I.e. nobody knowing the knowledge. The knowledge is appearing like everything is. So then IS that still intelligence if the knowledge (that we believe is "known" by the fictitious I entity we believe is more than simply more mirages of ideas and stories), is only smoke and mirrors?

That's something to ponder in the shower. I'm not certain of that answer.

Your knowledge is that knowledge is appearing.

Knowledge is real i would say, is knowledge not unavoidable in some sense?

You claim is that everything is appearing, which is a form of knowledge, knowledge about appearence appearing.

What knowledge illuminates is that everything is appearance according to your view, and that knowledge is a random mirage, which is a knowledge claim.

 

[RMQualtrough]

13 hours ago, Adamq8 said:

Your knowledge is that knowledge is appearing.

Knowledge is real i would say, is knowledge not unavoidable in some sense?

You claim is that everything is appearing, which is a form of knowledge, knowledge about appearence appearing.

What knowledge illuminates is that everything is appearance according to your view, and that knowledge is a random mirage, which is a knowledge claim.

 

I'm not sure, it might be one of those loaded concepts like "consciousness" where by using the term you immediately change what it is... Like seen objects which appear in spite of not being seen by anyone or anything at all. The seen object being the very thing that it is, standalone. Maybe similarly knowledge is like that, where the "knowing" is the very thing that so-called knowledge is, as opposed to it being something known BY God or You or Brahman, or whatever other mythological creature.

E.g. the knowing of X is the actual appearance itself, it is the exact thing that is, alone, like how the redness of red is the very appearance itself. Not X known by Y or red seen by Z.

[axiom]

51 minutes ago, RMQualtrough said:

E.g. the knowing of X is the actual appearance itself, it is the exact thing that is, alone, like how the redness of red is the very appearance itself. Not X known by Y or red seen by Z.

Right. Appearance can appear as "knowing", just as it can appear as "experience". But both are just appearance. As such, "knowing" is a misapprehension. It has no value and no meaning.

In a particularly weird dream, a penis glued to the forehead is the deepest attainable truth.

The dream characters all think to themselves "Look, we know that a penis glued to the forehead is the deepest truth! Until you realise this you have not truly awoken!"... but their belief is no more profound than "blah blah blah". None of it has any meaning beyond the self-serving logic of the dream. Including this.

This post is exactly equivalent to "blah blah blah".

All talking, all writing, all thinking... everything... is meaningless.

Edited September 29, 2022 by axiom

[Scholar]

I have tried to make the blind see. The responses of you guys is so far off the mark that I have no more hope that I will ever be capable of communicating this to anyone. You are utterly stuck in your own perspectives.

[Danioover9000]

@Scholar

4 minutes ago, Scholar said:

I have tried to make the blind see. The responses of you guys is so far off the mark that I have no more hope that I will ever be capable of communicating this to anyone. You are utterly stuck in your own perspectives.

   Case closed! @Leo Gura and mods, you know what to do.