Let me scare you real quick

[Osaid]

9 hours ago, Squeekytoy said:

I still think (sorry lol) that you're completely misunderstanding and misrepresenting the purpose and role of proper philosophy in this work. 

There's a good reason why Osho and any enlightened person makes sure to distinguish it from what they are talking about. I am just trying to point out that reason. 

[Rafael Thundercat]

On 24/12/2023 at 7:52 PM, OldManCorcoran said:

When you're speaking to someone, the words they are saying are just your own thoughts. There's not a person actually saying the words, the words are just your thoughts and the person speaking them is just an image which accompanies the thoughts. The two aren't actually connected in any way at all, the thoughts are happening and it just so happens the image of a human face with a moving mouth is appearing in conjunction.

You have thoughts in your head right now. Just imagine a talking face image accompanied them. Speaking to a person is just that. It's just your own thoughts accompanied by a hallucinated visual of a face. The words aren't actually coming from the face the words are thoughts appearing in your mind exactly and precisely the same as whatever thoughts you have now when you close your eyes.

This is literal, not metaphors or riddles.

You.didnt scare.me.at all, there is no me here. Do you think you can make God.shit his pants?

[Osaid]

45 minutes ago, Squeekytoy said:

There's plenty of ass talkers taking that side and they aren't delivering. If I had kept listening to them I would be much worse off than I am, and it took me long enough to even see through all their bullshit to begin with. They aren't proponents of truth, they are the last line of defense for the lie. Damn me if I'm gonna knowingly help them do that.

If it weren't for Leo I probably wouldn't have gotten enlightened as quick as I would have, but we both agree he has basically lost the plot. It was like a necessary evil, but it doesn't have to be that way at all if someone knows what they are talking about. I was always very intellectual and philosophical so he spoke my language, and that hooked me in. But it is not necessary to go that route if you have someone to tell you "there's no need to philosophize about this, all you have to do is inquire about your direct experience until you realize that you can't think about yourself." All my philosophizing made me very good at inquiring about experience and that did help a lot especially when I did self-inquiry, but that was its limit. Anything gained from it aside from purely my ability to inquire and question things was basically mental baggage. I basically maxed out my ability to inquire years ago, then the rest of the time was just me running circles around random intellectual and metaphysical ideas which were completely unrelated to my actual experience. It took someone who actually knew what they were talking about to redirect me and say "It's not about philosophy, inquire about this instead and you will eventually immediately and permanently figure out what your experience is."

45 minutes ago, Squeekytoy said:

The original and only real aim of philosophy is to find out what's true. And I would not make the same claim about spirituality.

The intention doesn't really matter if it doesn't work. Enlightenment itself is not philosophical or spiritual at all. It is completely secular and unique to itself. Can spirituality lead there? Maybe, but that is just what leads there, it is not enlightenment. Can philosophy lead there? Maybe, but that is just what leads there, it is not enlightenment. Enlightenment has nothing to do with spirituality or philosophy in the same way that the color red has nothing to do with any of those. You can certainly look at red in a way that is spiritual, and you can certainly philosophize about what red is, but red itself does not pertain itself to any of those.

Edited January 10 by Osaid

[Osaid]

27 minutes ago, Squeekytoy said:

But despite some of Leo's positions I do share many of his opinions about what passes for nonduality and spirituality. 

Leo doesn't even believe in non-duality anymore.

I'm not even talking about opinion. I am saying there is an objective experiential shift you can have in your experience which prevents you from thinking about yourself ever again, and that this is enlightenment. This is the same thing every enlightened person across history has been pointing to, and it is not something that can get reinvented or integrated through more questioning and philosophizing over time. It is becoming aware of exactly what you and your experience is. It's like I'm telling you that I can see the color red and you're like "but have you questioned it enough?" Questioning red is not going to make the color red more true or accurate, because I am already experiencing exactly what it is. The only thing that can be refined or polished over time are your limited beliefs and concepts about experience, AKA intellect.

[AerisVahnEphelia]

@Squeekytoy 

If I had sex, I had sex, you cannot convince me I didn't, no matter how many words are fluffed out.

 

[Breakingthewall]

@Osaid

As I understand it, for you enlightenment is a shift from the intellectual to the direct, without filtering through the mind. This is of course a necessary step, you have to realize what the conceptual mind is and stop being hooked on it, but once you are established in the direct, that is where the real begins.

What you are has many layers, not intellectual but energetic. Enlightenment is going through all the layers, opening yourself completely, without center and without resistance. very few have done this, certainly not me. only at certain times using drugs, and only partially, but enough to understand what the panorama is, what I am and what my objective is.

Drugs break the energetic barriers that make you up, and they do not do it automatically, you must tend towards that result, be willing for it to happen. Then you realize how enormously difficult it is to get to that point, how you get blocked and why. This is where the constant work begins, which is something global, internal and external, to equalize yourself.

[Osaid]

7 hours ago, Breakingthewall said:

but once you are established in the direct, that is where the real begins.

Yes, that is where your life actually begins, you could say.

Not being enlightened is like playing a game of Super Mario while thinking you are Bowser. This causes a lot of suffering and confusion. Enlightenment is like realizing "oh I was Mario this entire time, what was I thinking" and then actually going on with your life and then playing and appreciating the game properly.

Edited January 11 by Osaid

[Breakingthewall]

7 hours ago, Squeekytoy said:

P.S. I agree with much of what @Breakingthewall is saying these days.

I appreciate that someone serious agrees with my views.

21 minutes ago, Osaid said:

Not being enlightened is like playing a game of Super Mario while thinking you are Bowser. This causes a lot of suffering and confusion. Enlightenment is like realizing "oh I was Mario this entire time, what was I thinking" and then actually going on with your life and then playing and appreciating the game properly.

Do you think this is the total depth of perception? This would mean that you are now without obstacles and without fear, totally open, reality itself. In my case, I think there are still barriers to break down.

[Osaid]

41 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

Do you think this is the total depth of perception?

Yes.

41 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

This would mean that you are now without obstacles and without fear, totally open, reality itself.

There is no imagined fear, yes. Otherwise, emotions like fear are an intelligent response to what you want, they ultimately serve you and they are in direct alignment with your desires. Emotions only become problematic when you believe you can imagine yourself, because this causes the emotion to perpetuate itself endlessly since you can imagine yourself from anywhere. When you imagine something fearful, that is because you want to perserve the imagination you have of yourself, in that sense it is intelligent because it serves your goal. If you cannot imagine yourself anymore, all fear is seen as essential to help you survive and perserve your actual body, which is what you want. Fear is not seen as "bad" when it is experienced in response to an immediate threat, although it can be objectively unpleasant. The unpleasant sensation tells you to move your body away from the threat in the exact same way physical pain makes you remove your hand from a hot stove. You would not say that feeling physical pain when touching a hot stove is a bad thing or a good thing, it is just intelligent and essential for learning how to survive. All emotions after being enlightened become completely situational, which means they are specific responses to certain situations, they have nothing to do with a person or object.

Edited January 11 by Osaid

[Breakingthewall]

@Osaid  

I don't mean fear if you find a hungry tiger in your room, but psychological fear. The mental patterns that make up the human psyche are based on fear, to a greater or lesser extent. If you sit down to meditate and achieve total openness, it means that the psyche has moved away, there is no structure, you are a window to the absolute. It is easy to see to what extent these structures are solid using psychedelics, since they modify the energetic patterns that form you and cause the barriers to manifest and sometimes dissolve.

[Osaid]

39 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

but psychological fear.

Yes, that automatically goes away. The only reason you experience psychological fear is because you believe that you can imagine yourself. You imagine yourself in past and future scenarios and then become scared of those scenarios happening to you. It is the belief that you can be afflicted by past and future scenarios which creates all psychological fear. It is essentially your sense of time which creates psychological fear, the idea that there is a you which has gone through the past and will go through the future.

Edited January 11 by Osaid

[Breakingthewall]

10 minutes ago, Osaid said:

Yes, that automatically goes away. The only reason it happens is because you believe that you can imagine yourself. You imagine yourself in past and future scenarios and then become scared of those scenarios happening to you. It is the belief that you can be afflicted by past and future scenarios which creates all psychological fear. It is essentially your sense of time which creates psychological fear, the idea that there is a you which has gone through the past and will go through the future.

I believe that the fact of living implies fear, it is innate, any living being fears stopping living. That's why 4-year-olds are not enlightened. They are pure and are not tied to the mind, they live directly, but they are full of fear and that limits them. 

In my opinion, going to the root of fear and dissolving it is extremely difficult, that is what we are trying to do here, and one of the problems is that this fear is hidden, it is not evident.

[Osaid]

24 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

any living being fears stopping living

If they want to be alive, yes. If there is no desire for living, then there is no fear. Like I said, the fear is intelligent in regards to what you desire.

24 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

That's why 4-year-olds are not enlightened.

4 year olds are quite rowdy, yes. I would say they are not as pure as you think, as they basically absorb what they learn from their surroundings like a sponge, and that is by design so that they can learn how to survive. That means they absorb all the beliefs and reactions of their parents. But if you dial it back a bit, an infant would be a better example and I would actually consider them enlightened. An infant would not even be scared of a lion in front of it. It also has close to zero imaginative capacity. It has to learn from its parents and its own experience what to fear first. When you combine your knowledge of things that can harm you with the desire to live, that is what creates fear in accordance with sustaining your survival. For infants in particular, they do not even have a concept of not being alive, so their desire to live would more accurately just be a desire to avoid painful sensations.

24 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

going to the root of fear and dissolving it is extremely difficult, that is what we are trying to do here, and one of the problems is that this fear is hidden, it is not evident.

I think you will find that coincidentally all of it ties back into your idea of yourself, AKA the ego. There is a root structure, which is your belief in what you think you are. If it is uprooted, then so are all the neuroses that stem from it.

Edited January 11 by Osaid

[Breakingthewall]

51 minutes ago, Osaid said:

think you will find that coincidentally all of it ties back into your idea of yourself, AKA the ego. There is a root structure, which is your belief in what you think you are. If it is uprooted, then so are all the neuroses that stem from it.

Rats have no idea about themselves and are not enlightened, their minds are limited, completely focused on interacting with their environment, focused outward. enlightenment is focusing the mind inward and opening yourself to the source, it is not something as simple as what you are proposing

[Osaid]

Just now, Breakingthewall said:

Rats have no idea about themselves 

Yes, exactly, they have no idea about themselves, therefore they are completely focused on their experience of themselves, that means it is impossible for them to have an ego and therefore they are enlightened.

Enlightenment is very simple. Only humans can become unenlightened because of their ability to imagine things. It is the state of not being enlightened which is complex, not enlightenment. Enlightenment is subtractive in nature, it is a removal of the false identity which human imagination creates. Human imagination is complex, not enlightenment.

A worm cannot delude itself into thinking that it is finite because it lacks the capacity to think. To be enlightened as a human means being able to think but also simultaneously seeing that the thought is not true beyond what it exists as.

[Breakingthewall]

5 minutes ago, Osaid said:

Yes, exactly, they have no idea about themselves, therefore they are completely focused on their experience of themselves, that means it is impossible for them to have an ego and therefore they are enlightened.

Enlightenment is very simple. Only humans can become unenlightened because of their ability to imagine things. It is the state of not being enlightened which is complex, not enlightenment. Enlightenment is subtractive in nature, it is a removal of the false identity which human imagination creates. Human imagination is complex, not enlightenment.

A worm cannot delude itself into thinking that it is finite because it lacks the capacity to think. To be enlightened as a human means being able to think but also simultaneously seeing that the thought is not true beyond what it exists as.

No, that is not enlightenment, you confuse enlightenment with mindfulness. For enlightenment to exist, ego must first exist. The ego becomes aware of itself, then, in some cases, it turns its gaze inward, breaks all barriers and opens to the source of existence, to the living infinity. It is an evolutionary step. Animals have no ego, they are direct, unfiltered experience, but limited to the surface. As a human you can also live like this, a guy from a tribe from a hundred thousand years ago lived that way and was not enlightened.

[Osaid]

Quote

No, that is not enlightenment, you confuse enlightenment with mindfulness. For enlightenment to exist, ego must first exist.

It is the exact same mechanism. The duality of enlightenment depends on an ego existing, and that is created by human intelligence. Unenlightenment is an invention of human imagination. Animals do not have that intelligence, and so they exist enlightened. The lack of a finite identity exists equally in animals and enlightened humans, that is what creates enlightenment.

I believe you are conflating ego and intelligence to be the same thing, but they are not. I am not saying that enlightenment is a removal of your ability to imagine things, it is just seeing what imagination truly is. When you are not enlightened it is because you cannot perceive your imagination properly. Being enlightened is simply just perceiving your intelligence properly, it is not a removal of intelligence, but rather a removal of a false identification with that intelligence.

[Breakingthewall]

9 minutes ago, Osaid said:

is the exact same mechanism. The duality of enlightenment depends on an ego existing, and that is created by human intelligence. Unenlightenment is an invention of human imagination. Animals do not have that intelligence, and so they exist enlightened. The lack of a finite identity exists equally in animals and enlightened humans, that is what creates enlightenment.

Animals do not enter into mystical ecstasy by merging with the living infinity. Animals look outwards and can never look inwards and open themselves to infinity. Psychedelics are the key for people like us, without them, the barriers are practically insurmountable, with some exceptions.

[Osaid]

15 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

Animals do not enter into mystical ecstasy by merging with the living infinity.

They are definitely merged with infinity, that is what not having an ego means.

15 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

Animals look outwards and can never look inwards 

Animals don't even make the distinction between outward and inward to begin with.

[Breakingthewall]

1 hour ago, Osaid said:

They are definitely merged with infinity, that is what not having an ego means.

Animals don't even make the distinction between outward and inward to begin with.

1 hour ago, Osaid said:

 

That is why animals cannot leave their experience, they are the experience, they do not have a self, it is the self that separates itself from the experience and enters an intermediate and strange state that is human life, and has the possibility of going through the experience and open to the source.