What is Panspiritism?

[Atla]

That's beacuse there is no actual sensation of Oneness, of universal Awareness. In deep meditation we simply feel our own human self-awareness generated by the billions of brain cells etc. but that sensation is localized to the human head. Our true self doesn't feel like anything at all.

I find it annoying how most nondualists don't see through this second major illusion, and don't go through the second stage of the awakening process. At the end of which, it becomes perfectly clear that this reality we are experiencing directly right now is the only real one.

We're talking here about going beyond sensations and feelings so what you say about meditation and Reality seems odd. Are you endorsing naive realism?

I wonder if you're confusing the currently fashionable mindfulness meditation with Yoga.

What you say, in effect, is that you are a buddha. This is perfectly possible but is it what you meant to say?

I don't really understand your questions. I'm not endorsing naive realism, what we see directly is both a part of direct reality and also a representation of "outside objects" (other parts of direct reality). At the same time. And as a representation it can go very wrong.

I'm not sure what going beyond sensations and feelings means, just saying that we shouldn't misunderstand them.

I'm not sure what a buddha is. If a buddha is simply awake, then many people are buddhas including me. If it means reaching a complete blowing out, well no such thing exists. There are also 1-2 other meanings I can think of.

[Atla]

it becomes perfectly clear that this reality we are experiencing directly right now is the only real one.

That's one way to neuter all human emotions, memories and desires. Pretend they aren't real.

I say "real" and you read it as "not real". Typical Timeseeker

[Skepdick]

it becomes perfectly clear that this reality we are experiencing directly right now is the only real one.

That's one way to neuter all human emotions, memories and desires. Pretend they aren't real.

I say "real" and you read it as "not real". Typical Timeseeker

You also said that the "now" is the only real one, which necessarily implies that experiences of the past are not real - otherwise known as memories.
And experiences of the future are not real - otherwise known as desires.

You are still trying to pretend that time doesn't exist. Typical sophist.

[Atla]

That's one way to neuter all human emotions, memories and desires. Pretend they aren't real.

I say "real" and you read it as "not real". Typical Timeseeker

You also said that the "now" is the only real one, which necessarily implies that experiences of the past are not real - otherwise known as memories.
And experiences of the future are not real - otherwise known as desires.

You are still trying to pretend that time doesn't exist. Typical sophist.

I didn't mention memories or desires in this thread; nor did I pretend that time doesn't exist. How many times did you lie just now? Typical Timeseeker

[Skepdick]

I didn't mention memories or desires in this thread; nor did I pretend that time doesn't exist. How many times did you lie just now? Typical Timeseeker

I think I caught you in yet another lie... That's twice in a day.

[Atla]

I didn't mention memories or desires in this thread; nor did I pretend that time doesn't exist. How many times did you lie just now? Typical Timeseeker

I think I caught you in yet another lie... That's twice in a day.

Don't try to "think" then The results are horrifying

[Skepdick]

Don't try to "think" then The results are horrifying

Well, if you think getting caught lying is "horrifying" then just stop lying?

[Atla]

Don't try to "think" then The results are horrifying

Well, if you think getting caught lying is "horrifying" then just stop lying?

And again you lie

[PeteJ]

I'm not sure what a buddha is. If a buddha is simply awake, then many people are buddhas including me. If it means reaching a complete blowing out, well no such thing exists. There are also 1-2 other meanings I can think of.

The meaning is, among other things, that you know the truth about these issues and are not speculating.

Exploring what is beyond feelings, desires and sensations is what meditation is about.

[Atla]

I'm not sure what a buddha is. If a buddha is simply awake, then many people are buddhas including me. If it means reaching a complete blowing out, well no such thing exists. There are also 1-2 other meanings I can think of.

The meaning is, among other things, that you know the truth about these issues and are not speculating.

Exploring what is beyond feelings, desires and sensations is what meditation is about.

I know that we are it (tat tvam asi), and I also went through the ego death but then quickly brought back the ego.
Ultimately everything is speculation, and there are different views on what the True Self is like. I wrote that the feeling of awareness that many people attribute to the True Self, is very likely yet another illusion.

Beyond everything there's just a void (from a more Buddhist perspective) or the infinite (from a more Advaita perspective), our True Self, but it doesn't feel like anything in particular. And the feelings, desires and sensations are also ("parts" of) our True Self.

[PeteJ]

I'm not sure what a buddha is. If a buddha is simply awake, then many people are buddhas including me. If it means reaching a complete blowing out, well no such thing exists. There are also 1-2 other meanings I can think of.

The meaning is, among other things, that you know the truth about these issues and are not speculating.

Exploring what is beyond feelings, desires and sensations is what meditation is about.

I know that we are it (tat tvam asi), and I also went through the ego death but then quickly brought back the ego.
Ultimately everything is speculation, and there are different views on what the True Self is like. I wrote that the feeling of awareness that many people attribute to the True Self, is very likely yet another illusion.

If you knew your stuff you would not be saying 'very likely'. I feel you're making your mind up on certain issues rather than investigating them.

How can you say 'everything is speculation' while you endorse a doctrine that asks us to abandon speculation for knowledge?

Are you suggesting the mystics speculate and teach only theories? This would be to dismiss the Perennial philosophy as nonsense.

I'm somewhat confused.

[Atla]

If you knew your stuff you would not be saying 'very likely'. I feel you're making your mind up on certain issues rather than investigating them.

How can you say 'everything is speculation' while you endorse a doctrine that asks us to abandon speculation for knowledge?

Are you suggesting the mystics speculate and teach only theories? This would be to dismiss the Perennial philosophy as nonsense.

I'm somewhat confused.

I'll repeat it again: to me, nondualism means a worldview without fundamental separations, divisions. Both logically, scientifically and through direct investigation we can see that it fits 100%.

So every way we look at it, it looks like we've found the correct worldview, and I accepted it as probably true.

But that's STILL no guarantee, as ultimately we can't know anything for certain, so on some level I still keep an open mind. Those who put absolute faith into direct knowledge have gone one step too far and are perverting nondualism. There is NO 100% certainty, not even through direct knowledge.

And they seem to know little about the many strange occurences and special cases within the human mind, that can be misunderstood. I happen to have decades of direct experience with that.

[Sculptor]

Are you suggesting the mystics speculate and teach only theories? This would be to dismiss the Perennial philosophy as nonsense.

I'm somewhat confused.

I'm not surprised that you are confused since you react in that way to the possibility that the Perennial Philosophy might be nonsense, when it so clearly is 100% speculative nonsense.

The only basis for Perennialism is hopes and wishes; like the existence of fairies.

[PeteJ]

So every way we look at it, it looks like we've found the correct worldview, and I accepted it as probably true.

Okay. But when you say it cannot be verified as true you reject the doctrine and I find this anomalous.

There is also the question of where the doctrine comes from. According to your view someone must have made it up, but this would be like making up quantum mechanics.

Basically, you're suggesting that all teachers of the doctrine including the writer of the Baghavad Gita, The Buddhist sutras, the Tao Te Ching, the Upanishads are making it up, and even people like Ramana Maharshi and Mooji are making it up. You're proposing that all these people and countless thousands of other testifiers are liars.

I can understand the hand-waiving comment by Sculptor because he clearly knows nothing about the topic, but you know more and endorse much of teachings so it seems odd you deny the knowledge claims of those who teach it.

Not arguing, just intrigued by a view I've never come across before.

[Skepdick]

So every way we look at it, it looks like we've found the correct worldview, and I accepted it as probably true.

Okay. But when you say it cannot be verified as true you reject the doctrine and I find this anomalous.

There is also the question of where the doctrine comes from. According to your view someone must have made it up, but this would be like making up quantum mechanics.

Basically, you're suggesting that all teachers of the doctrine including the writer of the Baghavad Gita, The Buddhist sutras, the Tao Te Ching, the Upanishads are making it up, and even people like Ramana Maharshi and Mooji are making it up. You're proposing that all these people and countless thousands of other testifiers are liars.

I can understand the hand-waiving comment by Sculptor because he clearly knows nothing about the topic, but you know more and endorse much of teachings so it seems odd you deny the knowledge claims of those who teach it.

Not arguing, just intrigued by a view I've never come across before.

If you SAY that you endorse multiple teachers/teachings, you are effectively endorsing pluralism, which is a performative contradiction of non-dualism.

Atla's game is the desperate avoidance of the Liar's paradox which is the birth-place of all dualism.