I was happier as a kid

[Salvijus]

28 minutes ago, Osaid said:

Why would being absorbed in infinity exclude the body?

The example I gave earlier could help to explain this. 

It's like when I play video games(just as an example) , during that intense period I forget all about my life problems, hunger, pain, plans about my future, relationship problems, everything is gone from my experience.  Most gamers should know that feeling when they forget all their bodily needs suddenly. And when the game is finished they remember "fuck I forgot i was cooking food and now it's burned" 

That's how it is with someone with zero interest in the ego. Nothing that is related to survival matters anymore to them. And with that pain of 50.years is nothing to them aswell. Not something that they would even notice. Or pay attention to. 

Edited March 20 by Salvijus

[Salvijus]

I'm done. This makes too much sense. 

[Osaid]

9 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

It's not about excluding the body, it's about giving it no value. It is only ego that gives value to the body. Pure awareness sees everything just neutral event. Neutral energy. 

You don't need ego to give value to things. You don't need to imagine things in order to give value to things. When you remove meaning from existence you don't arrive at a lack of value. You don't need to imagine meaning or value in order for things to have value. That is why vanilla ice cream tastes good despite what you think or imagine about it.

What you're talking about is not neutral at all. It is a limitation which says that you shouldn't care about things. It is a limitation which says that you cannot value things. You will drive yourself insane imagining a limitation like that because it goes against the inherent experiential value of existence.

17 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

Because... 

Imagine there is a glorious beautiful blazing sunset and on your left there is poo on the ground. Then I will ask you. Which one are you going to pay attention to? A sunset or a poo? 

That's how it is with someone who has lost interest in serving the ego. His attention is so absorbed on bliss of creation that a sensation of pain is completely not worth paying attention to. 

Please tell me this makes sense... 

So the body is analogous to "poop" or "pain"? I don't think that analogy tracks appropriately. Why would the universe exclude poop or pain from infinity; just because it is less pleasant to look at? Pleasurable feelings do not dictate whether something is infinite or not.

A lack of attention is not no self. That is just a lack of pain. No self is not about deciding to focus on pleasurable sensations. There are many who lack pain and experience blissful states who still have a self.

[Javfly33]

26 minutes ago, Osaid said:

Again, there is a difference between being a human and thinking that you are a human. Thinking that you are a human is self. It is imagination. It is thinking.

@Osaid This makes sense.

A human appears interacting with a 'world' appears but it doesn´t seem there is a self in my experience. Until I create it. Then all illusion starts haha. 

 

[Salvijus]

10 minutes ago, Osaid said:

You don't need ego to give value to things. You don't need to imagine things in order to give value to things. When you remove meaning from existence you don't arrive at a lack of value. You don't need to imagine meaning or value in order for things to have value. That is why vanilla ice cream tastes good despite what you think or imagine about it

I would politely disagree here. And here's why. 

A taste of vanilla has no value. It's just a sensation. Pain has no value. It's just a sensation. All sensations are neutral and without meaning ultimately

The only reason we prefer some sensations over other is becomes of ego. Ego is what puts some things as more valuable than others and it does so to serve its survival.

 

Edited March 20 by Salvijus

[Salvijus]

5 minutes ago, Osaid said:

So the body is analogous to "poop" or "pain"? I don't think that analogy tracks appropriately. Why would the universe exclude poop or pain from infinity; just because it is less pleasant to look at? Pleasurable feelings do not dictate whether something is infinite or not.

Maybe it wasn't the best explanation. The explanation with a video game makes my point better I believe

[Osaid]

1 minute ago, Salvijus said:

A taste of vanilla has no value. It's just a sensation. Pain has no value. It's just a sensation. All sensation are neutral ultimately.

The sensation is the value. That is why your body retracts when tasting something bitter instead of something sweet. That reaction itself is the value it provides. You don't need to imagine value further than that. You can't just imagine value onto something bitter by saying "I like tasting things that are bitter" because it doesn't actually change the sensation itself. It only changes how you imagine it. And then perhaps that imagination has value to you as well.

There is no such thing as a "neutral sensation" because every single sensation is different. It is like saying all colors are neutral.

[Salvijus]

6 minutes ago, Osaid said:

The sensation is the value. That is why your body retracts when tasting something bitter instead of something sweet. That reaction itself is the value it provides. You don't need to imagine value further than that. You can't just imagine value onto something bitter by saying "I like tasting things that are bitter" because it doesn't actually change the sensation itself. It only changes how you imagine it. And then perhaps that imagination has value to you as well.

There is no such thing as a "neutral sensation" because every single sensation is different. It is like saying all colors are neutral.

When you taste smth bitter there is a chemical reaction with the body yes. But there is also a psychological reaction to the substance. 

"I like bitter food, I don't like bitter food" is an ego reaction. Body doesn't care at all how things taste only ego does. 

And here's an interesting thought. If the likes and dislikes of the ego are gone. Then suddenly... All events become neatrual.. Or all sensations become meaningless in other words. 

Wow. Did you see how it all connects?

Edited March 20 by Salvijus

[Osaid]

29 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

The example I gave earlier could help to explain this. 

It's like when I play video games(just as an example) , during that intense period I forget all about my life problems, hunger, pain, plans about my future, relationship problems, everything is gone from my experience.  Most gamers should know that feeling when they forget all their bodily needs suddenly. And when the game is finished they remember "fuck I forgot i was cooking food and now it's burned" 

That's how it is with someone with zero interest in the ego. Nothing that is related to survival matters anymore to them. And with that pain of 50.years is nothing to them aswell. Not something that they would even notice. Or pay attention to. 

I'm not denying that your shift in attention phased out the pain because of a difference in desire. I'm just denying that this excludes pain from infinity. There is no boundary or limitation to the sensation of pain, it is as infinite as anything else.

What you experienced was a shift in attention or desire, not necessarily a lack of ego. It's not like the video game induced enlightenment or no self.

[Salvijus]

3 minutes ago, Osaid said:

I'm not denying that your shift in attention phased out the pain because of a difference in desire. I'm just denying that this excludes pain from infinity. There is no boundary or limitation to the sensation of pain, it is as infinite as anything else.

What you experienced was a shift in attention or desire, not necessarily a lack of ego. It's not like the video game induced enlightenment or no self.

Shift in focus. Yes. And how is that different from say, losing all interest in survival when it becomes clear you're infinite and can not die? 

Edited March 20 by Salvijus

[seriousman24]

The neutral sensation he's referring to probably has to do with the subtle pleasurable sensation that comes from intelligent "analysis" which allows to put things in their place, the relatively clean and uncorrupted pleasure of mental organization and neutral awareness that is able to cleanly distinguish between things and make good decisions.

 

5 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

When you taste smth bitter there is a chemical reaction with the body yes. But there is also a psychological reaction to the substance. 

"I like bitter food, I don't like bitter food" is an ego reaction. Body doesn't care at all how things taste only ego does. 

And here's an interesting thought. If the likes and dislikes of the ego are gone. Then suddenly... All events become neatrual.. 

Wow. Did you see how it all connects?

The neutrality of events is also a chemical reaction, including our thoughts, by neutrality I believe you mean that the events simply become irrelevant, no longer necessary, you no longer need to spend painful energy on them, you're saying there is a boredom attached to them at some point in some way and that there is something better to focus on, so here the ego for you is currently being defined as that which is the thing to more strongly pay attention to so that it can be ignored because it is painful or because it's more pleasurable to be neutral.

So we're still simply doing thing because they "taste" "better" or "worse, neutrality is simply tasting better right now.

Edited March 20 by seriousman24

[Osaid]

Just now, Salvijus said:

"I like bitter food, I don't like bitter food" is am ego reaction. Body doesn't care at all how things taste only ego does. 

And here's an interesting thought. If the likes and dislikes of the ego are gone. Then suddenly... All events become neatrual..

The body absolutely does care. You will experience physical biological motivators like an uptick in dopamine for example. And that is unrelated to what you think or imagine about it. You can't imagine or think that away. Being physically tired is not neutral, that is your body indicating that you should go to sleep. You can't imagine or think that away. The idea of a "neutral sensation" is fantasy. Your imagination does not control whether a physical sensation is neutral or not.

Your preference for vanilla over chocolate is also completely unrelated to ego. You did not decide that you want to prefer vanilla over chocolate. If you think that you did decide it, that is where ego begins, not the actual physical occurrence.

You are conflating biology with ego.

[Salvijus]

5 minutes ago, Osaid said:

 

 

4 minutes ago, seriousman24 said:

The neutrality of events is also a chemical reaction

I could also add. All chemical reactions are a neutral event aswell. It means they have no meaning at all. Only ego ascribes meaning to things. 

[Osaid]

6 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

losing all interest in survival when it becomes clear you're infinite and can not die? 

Death is not a necessary motivator for being alive. You don't lose interest in life when you realize you can't die.

[seriousman24]

I think you're both entirely correct, we're always fighting over definitions and I think this fight and evolution is worth it which is why it happens, both being entirely correct actually does elevate the interaction specially when there are differences, the differences interact and everyone hopefully comes out better in some way which is why I feel so robotic about the things I write about too, like I'm typing out almost nothing but it's fun so I still do it.

Edited March 20 by seriousman24

[Salvijus]

2 minutes ago, Osaid said:

The body absolutely does care. You will experience physical biological motivators like an uptick in dopamine for example. And that is unrelated to what you think or imagine about it. You can't imagine or think that away. Being physically tired is not neutral, that is your body indicating that you should go to sleep. You can't imagine or think that away. The idea of a "neutral sensation" is fantasy. Your imagination does not control whether a physical sensation is neutral or not.

Your preference for vanilla over chocolate is also completely unrelated to ego. You did not decide that you want to prefer vanilla over chocolate. If you think that you did decide it, that is where ego begins, not the actual physical occurrence.

You are conflating biology with ego.

Relax relax

Let me explain more then and to clarify. 

Yes. Food will have a chemical reaction to the body. No disagreements here. 

What I'm saying is this. Every event, every change that happens in the body, every sensation that arises, all of it is ultimately meaningless, or neutral event. 

I hope you can make a bit of effort to understand what I'm trying to say 🙏

[seriousman24]

2 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

 

I could also add. All chemical reactions are a neutral event aswell. It means they have no meaning at all. Only ego ascribes meaning to things. 

Meaning is painful isn't it, at least that's what it feels like as the unthinking monkey that I'm feeling like right now.

[Breakingthewall]

48 minutes ago, Osaid said:

A human is not self. A human is. A plant is. A self also is, but it is only ever imagination. And it can be unimagined.

Again, there is a difference between being a human and thinking that you are a human. Thinking that you are a human is self. It is imagination. It is thinking.

57 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

 

The self is part of the human, genetically programed. all humans who have ever existed had a self, and there have been many. It's not imaginary, it's real, same than the memory. There are real energetic patterns, neural pathways as solid as bones.

[Salvijus]

2 minutes ago, Osaid said:

Death is not a necessary motivator for being alive. You don't lose interest in life when you realize you can't die.

There is one other motivator to be alive that I consciously not bringing it in into this convo because I feel it would unnecessary complicate the topic. Everything else I say is fully logical still. 

[Osaid]

Just now, Salvijus said:

all of it is ultimately meaningless, or neutral event. 

If you equate "meaningless" with "neutral" then I agree, but your previous answers indicate that a lack of meaning is equivalent to a lack of care or value, which is not the case.