Here's why is impossible to be "bored" or craving artificial stimulation if you Awake

[Carl-Richard]

11 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

Everything is relative. Neither you nor me can say anything that is absolute. No problem with that.

Holding enlightenment as a relative thing is, which you insist on doing. This is a trap. You still think of it as something that can be correlated with brain functions, an attainment that you can aspire to, that tools and practices get you to it, etc. I'm actually saying this is false. Enlightenment is another matter. 

Language is whatever it is and is necessary for communication to occur. It is also an invention. This goes deeper than language, though. How we hold things to be is represented by the way one talks. 

Yes, it is a repetitive argument.

In any case, we're talking BS and don't know squat. Time to get enlightened and save ourselves the speculation and mental masturbation. 

Hold it as an open possibility.

This is all good, but the problem occurs when I ask why you choose to meditate regularly (which is presumably something you do). Then you have to do this linguistic dance of "well, technically meditation doesn't achieve anything, blah blah blah". I say save yourself the linguistic dance and just say you do it for enlightenment. Your mind is flexible enough to understand that you're in this case talking about a relative thing and not the Absolute, and it's so much simpler. And you actually do this generally with other words: words often have different meanings depending on context. You don't generally strive to hold on to one context-free definition of a word. You go with the flow of the context. But sure, enlightenment is a touchy subject and maybe you think highlighting the absolute side of things is very important, but I'm a bit more pragmatic than that.

[Breakingthewall]

14 hours ago, Inliytened1 said:

The stuff of addiction - the stuff of boredom - this is the stuff of the ego.   Where I raise the flag is that the ego is also God, so the ego brings something back.  It brings awareness back.  The challenge then, as it was for Alan Watts, is if you WANT to entertain a Godlike existence as the ego.  You may WANT to fall into the selfishness of the ego - or allow yourself to do so.  That is your choice as God. Death is no longer a fear to you - not really.

Awakening to reality is Abandoning the dream of the conditioned mind, to begin with, and after that, going deeper into what reality is. If you have opened up to now, you will only want to open up more. And also be an alcoholic? impossible. no addiction. any addiction is a need to escape from the now. what you want is exactly the opposite, to merge with him now as much as possible. There are a lot of deceived people, maybe watts was one of them

[zurew]

12 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

This is a trap. You still assume it is something that can be correlated with brain functions, an attainment that you can aspire to, that tools and practices get you to it, etc. This is false. Enlightenment is another matter. 

So do you have a position , where  beating one's self with a stick 8 hours a day vs  doing  8 hour meditation every day  continuously for 40 years vs watching a film on netflix - all have one thing in common:

They are completely useless when it comes to enlightenment (or in other words they all have the same amount of utility in the context of enlightenment), because nothing will get you to enlightenment and nothing in the relative domain (no thought process or method or activity or drug) will get you any closer to enlightenment (not even 1 step closer).

Edited August 25, 2023 by zurew

[UnbornTao]

On 8/25/2023 at 2:25 PM, Carl-Richard said:

This is all good, but the problem occurs when I ask why you choose to meditate regularly (which is presumably something you do). Then you have to do this linguistic dance of "well, technically meditation doesn't achieve anything, blah blah blah". I say save yourself the linguistic dance and just say you do it for enlightenment. Your mind is flexible enough to understand that you're in this case talking about a relative thing and not the Absolute, and it's so much simpler. And you actually do this generally with other words: words often have different meanings depending on context. You don't generally strive to hold on to one context-free definition of a word. You go with the flow of the context. But sure, enlightenment is a touchy subject and maybe you think highlighting the absolute side of things is very important, but I'm a bit more pragmatic than that.

To be clear, I'm not invalidating the relative domain. I think it should be studied and mastered. I'm just saying that enlightenment is not a thing (man I'm obnoxious). So we're in a dilemma: no action produces enlightenment, and yet it is possible for oneself to become conscious. How come? No idea.

Sure, different definitions of this matter can work (for what, though?) as long as we don't take them seriously. It is up for grabs.

I'm clear that no practice by itself can ever produce consciousness, it may help increase it by focusing the mind, etc. It is a breakthrough -- always sudden and now. I contemplate organically "Who am I?" while recognizing that it is something I do, not the practice, so to speak.

Not saying meditation, yoga, reading, breath-work, semen retention, psychedelics or fasting shouldn't be done. As beneficial as certain practices can be, their purposes are different from enlightenment. In this regard, what can be done and is helpful is intending to know, being open that such a breakthrough is possible for you now. You'd be as if waiting for it to occur, aka contemplation.

At some other time, we could tackle what language is.

In any case, until after several enlightenment experiences, all of this belongs to the category of mere hearsay and speculation. All my posts on this thread, in retrospect, seem to be quite pointless too. So everyone, go get enlightened, then you can tell us what it is.

Happy contemplation.

Edited August 28, 2023 by UnbornTao

[UnbornTao]

On 8/25/2023 at 3:01 PM, zurew said:

So do you have a position , where  beating one's self with a stick 8 hours a day vs  doing  8 hour meditation every day  continuously for 40 years vs watching a film on netflix - all have one thing in common:

They are completely useless when it comes to enlightenment (or in other words they all have the same amount of utility in the context of enlightenment), because nothing will get you to enlightenment and nothing in the relative domain (no thought process or method or activity or drug) will get you any closer to enlightenment (not even 1 step closer).

You think enlightenment is a process and that a practice can get you there. When it comes to Truth, near is too far. After all, it is already the case! The only requisite is becoming conscious.

This business might have nothing to do with use and utility.

Consider the dream analogy: Is doing X going to produce awakening as opposed to doing Y? They are both "dream stuff". X might be more useful than Y for mastering the mind and such, however, waking up is always done by you now. That's the meaning of direct.

Actions still have consequences. Clearly, meditating is worthwhile as it provides many benefits, especially compared to disempowering activities. Mastery, transformation, mind control, a study of the body, etc. are extremely worthwhile to pursue. But enlightenment is another matter.

The best you can do, it seems to me, is contemplating; want to know. A breakthrough doesn't seem to have factors, though; it occurs when it does, and it is a mystery to me why this is so.

Edited August 26, 2023 by UnbornTao