Non-duality and Solipsism

[Dontaskme]

Nonduality is saying there is only ONE Consciousness.

Nonduality IS NOT saying my mind is the only mind and there is nothing outside of my mind but more of my mind...(this is solipsism)

Solipsism is totally unrelated to the Nondual wisdom that says there is only ONE Consciousness.

There are billions of minds, and each mind is an appearance in that ONE Consciousness. The mind is the sense of I ...the mind is the ILLUSORY dividing aspect of reality which is ONE appearing as the MANY.



.

BEAUTIFULLY EXPLAINED HERE ..

https://non-duality.rupertspira.com/wat ... -solipsism

[Walker]

Does this mean that phenomena and its evidence exists independent of an observer, to be discovered and interpreted in similar ways by observers of the same species due to the limitations of incarnation?

[Lacewing]

There are billions of minds, and each mind is an appearance in that ONE Consciousness. The mind is the sense of I ...the mind is the ILLUSORY dividing aspect of reality which is ONE appearing as the MANY.

So, what is it when one mind (a sense of I) claims to see ultimate truth that differs from what other minds of the ONE consciousness see?

[AlexW]

So, what is it when one mind (a sense of I) claims to see ultimate truth that differs from what other minds of the ONE consciousness see?

A mind never sees anything - it only interprets. Consciousness (awareness, True Self, whatever...) is the ultimate seer/knower and is itself ultimate truth.
When you, the mind made self, claims something, it will never be "ultimate truth", it will always only be an interpretation and as such at a remove from truth... and as every mind made self uses different concepts based on different conditioning, the interpretation and as such the description of whatever has been seen will differ.
But you will still find certain similarities - e.g. that seeing ultimate truth is compared to peace, bliss, love (see: sat chit ananda). But we should never forget that these are only words, they are not the experience itself. Truth (the experience itself) cannot, ever, be grasped and communicated by the mind (via thought and language).
Trying to understand this mentally is like trying to attempt to learn how to ride a bike in your head - it will never work. You will have to put your behind on a bike a try and try again until you finally get it. Getting how to ride a bike is no mental feat - it happens naturally, just like everything that is true happens naturally.

[AlexW]

Does this mean that phenomena and its evidence exists independent of an observer, to be discovered and interpreted in similar ways by observers of the same species due to the limitations of incarnation?

"Phenomena", "evidence", the "observer" and its "interpretation" are all mind made. Consciousness knows nothing of these parts. In pure consciousness there is no limitation, no incarnation , no time, no space - there is only undivided being, the eternal now, I.

I know this sounds strange, even presumptuous, but this is what pure consciousness "is like" - it is not like anything you can think of, yet it contains all thinking, seeing, hearing, sensing... Again, its like riding a bike... to understand this you have to get out of your head and put your behind on the bike and experience it directly.

By the way: It is perfectly useless to discuss these kind of topics as they mix the relative and the absolute. Its like having lived your whole life in one room speculating what might be outside. You can only speculate using the concepts you have learned from being inside the room, but what if outside has nothing whatsoever to do with the contents of this room? ... and still we can't help ourselves talking about it, speculating and trying to explain what might be outside - its typical for the mind that it can't accept that there is "something" it will never know.

[Lacewing]

When you, the mind made self, claims something, it will never be "ultimate truth", it will always only be an interpretation and as such at a remove from truth... and as every mind made self uses different concepts based on different conditioning, the interpretation and as such the description of whatever has been seen will differ.

I agree. Each of us can say how we think it is for each of us -- but not how it is for ALL. And our interpretation of how it is for ourselves in the moment, is based on all kinds of influences, and can change with new information/awareness.

It is perfectly useless to discuss these kind of topics as they mix the relative and the absolute.

Yes! This is usually denied/unrealized by those who think they know ultimate truth that applies to everyone. They claim to be above or removed from their own influences.

its typical for the mind that it can't accept that there is "something" it will never know.

For whatever reasons, I accept that there are all kinds of personal and spiritual things I will never know -- also, what I think I "know" is simply something useful in this moment, and it could be nothing more than a dream. I've experienced my reality change in ways I could never imagine, so I accept the vastness of this Universe beyond my momentary thinking.

I feel compelled to question people who act so sure that they uniquely know reality and answers beyond themselves. They often seem fairly obsessed, and refuse to answer questions or discuss anything to the contrary. It seems so obviously contrived -- I don't know how intelligent, mentally-balanced people can convince themselves to maintain it.

There is so much brilliance all over the Earth, in so many varied forms! It makes absolutely no sense that a singular view would represent such vastness.

Although such discussions are useless in arriving at answers/truth, I think the exercise can be useful in revealing rigid or delusional aspects of ourselves that affect our experience and lives in general. It can be very liberating/life-changing to realize and accept what we don't and cannot know. Perhaps, through these discussions, some people on the sidelines, out of the spotlight of being challenged, can be inspired to loosen their grip on needing/claiming to know the unknowable.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Nonduality is saying there is only ONE Consciousness.

Nonduality IS NOT saying my mind is the only mind and there is nothing outside of my mind but more of my mind...(this is solipsism)

Solipsism is totally unrelated to the Nondual wisdom that says there is only ONE Consciousness.

There are billions of minds, and each mind is an appearance in that ONE Consciousness. The mind is the sense of I ...the mind is the ILLUSORY dividing aspect of reality which is ONE appearing as the MANY.

BEAUTIFULLY EXPLAINED HERE ..

https://non-duality.rupertspira.com/wat ... -solipsism

Solipsism is not a tenable theory.

7. The Incoherence of Solipsism
https://www.iep.utm.edu/solipsis/#H7

The empirical mind is a real thing and there is nothing wrong for the human mind to divide things in reality as separate and as one. For example there are separate things in the universe in one perspective but they are one bundle of energy from another perspective. This is empirically provable.

But to claim there is only ONE consciousness is illusory and delusional if the belief is persistent. The problem is such a claim is also made by those with mental illness, brain damage, drug users, etc.
Such a claim is not empirically provable and from that some theists has rhetorically claim that ONE consciousness is a God.

For some theists such a God delivers messages and commands through a prophet/messenger or son which is subsequently written in a holy texts by man.
What is worse is some holy commands in the holy texts contain evil laden elements that inspire believers to kill non-believers as a divine duty to please God.

[Dontaskme]

I feel compelled to question people who act so sure that they uniquely know reality and answers beyond themselves. They often seem fairly obsessed, and refuse to answer questions or discuss anything to the contrary. It seems so obviously contrived -- I don't know how intelligent, mentally-balanced people can convince themselves to maintain it.

There is no one to uniquely know reality for sure, nor have any answers. This assumed ''seeker'' is an idea, which has no existence in and of itself separate or outside of ''What Is''. All knowledge is sourced in Not-Knowing...rendering knowledge illusory.

I Am involves knowledge of existence, i.e. consciousness.

The appearance of knowledge which is just a conceptual narrative conjured up by the mind as and through the senses triggers the thought I am the knower of knowledge, but there is no such knower. There is awareness of knowledge, and this awareness is omnipresent meaning there is no separate knower, there is only knowing one with the knowing. ONE and NONE are the same Not-Knowing.

The world is nothing more than an embodiment perceived by the mind from the data of the five sense-organs.There are no objects in reality. Objects are created by the mind/ego from sense data.

.

[Dontaskme]

Does this mean that phenomena and its evidence exists independent of an observer, to be discovered and interpreted in similar ways by observers of the same species due to the limitations of incarnation?

I have no idea what you are asking.

.

[Dontaskme]

Solipsism is not a tenable theory.

Neither is Nonduality a tenable theory.

There is no such thing as Nonduality.

Duality is an illusion albeit a persistent one.

.

[Dontaskme]

We are exploring ''That which is aware, not what we are aware of ''

I point out that if we ''knew'' what awareness was, it would be an ''object of our awareness'', not awareness itself.

Awareness is this direct experience being aware of being aware. We cannot be our body, a body is the experience of awareness which is the only reality...experiencing itself as a body.


No object is aware, every object is being awared.


.

[Dontaskme]

This dimension of reality has been called, buddhamind. This state is acausal,without a cause,or unproduced. We don't need anything more than what we already have in order to be ''here''

Our conditioned experience unfolds in time,it is always changing. We can touch, feel, sense, and think about it. Nondual awareness, on the other hand, doesn't have any of these characteristics. It's not a ''thing''. We can't see it, we can't even think about it because there is nothing to think about. Nondual awareness is completely unrelated to you and me as different embodied minds. It's unrelated to the circumstances of our lives or the condition of our bodies and minds. We are born and we will die. We have gender, age, race, etc. Nondual awareness has none of these. It is transpersonal and transcultural.If we weren't aware we couldn't be aware of our thoughts, our words, or this forum. Awareness has to be always.

.

[Walker]

Does this mean that phenomena and its evidence exists independent of an observer, to be discovered and interpreted in similar ways by observers of the same species due to the limitations of incarnation?

I have no idea what you are asking.

.

In other words:

Is there a world without awareness of the world?

If so, if that is true, then one logical implication based on two realized premises is:

Awareness requires form + awareness exists independent of time = All those who were, are, and are mostly invisible from within this bricks and mortar, meat and bones realm.

[Dontaskme]

In other words:

Is there a world without awareness of the world?

Only you can answer that. Ask yourself, is there a world without me?

Can there be anything outside of you, can you get outside of you. Everything is an appearance in you, it's not out-there separate from you. You are the source of everything that is known to you.

If so, if that is true, then one logical implication based on two realized premises is:

Awareness requires form + awareness exists independent of time = All those who were, are, and are mostly invisible from within this bricks and mortar, meat and bones realm.

Awareness doesn't require form, awareness arises in conjunction with form, it's concurrent with form, as the form-less, they're inseparably one in the same instant. You are source and everything else in an illusion appearing in you.

Emptiness is form, form is emptiness. The YOU is empty fullness.

The Heart Sutra says, “all phenomena in their own-being are empty.” It doesn't say “all phenomena are empty.”

http://www.purifymind.com/FormEmp.htm

.

[Walker]

Because awareness does not “arise” without form, awareness requires form.

Does form require awareness?