Posts by jademarlin26

placidharbor7 said:If we follow that logic, then you’ll also have to admit that consciousness is completely immeasurable, right? It evades any kind of objective check or observation.

Which makes this whole claim from Master Raman an absolute absurdity, so let me just apologize to everyone right off the bat!

Think about it: when you and Parsifal claim to be "conscious," you aren't actually *aware* of that awareness. Instead, you're both just projecting your own memories onto a concept of "self" and "identity." It's like a coroner measuring a corpse (the past) while loudly shouting about how full of life they are! Oh, the irony! Honestly, trying to define the "self" is about as productive as snoring through a lecture—it's just a much more polite way of being foolish.

placidharbor7 explained this ages ago: it is fundamentally impossible to achieve what you, Parsifal, and all those other misguided believers call being "here and now." Because if you are truly "here and now"—you aren't "YOU"; and if you are "YOU"—then you aren't "here and now." Makes sense, doesn't it?

That "here and now" which you two, and so many others, so desperately label as "consciousness" is nothing more than a clumsy attempt to grab God by the beard.

"Consciousness" and the observer can never actually meet. All these claims regarding "consciousness"—especially in your specific case—are nothing more than pure spiritual amateurism.

Precisely. It is quite inconceivable to suggest that time exists in a place where it does not. The ego, thought, time, and the past simply cannot exist within the eternity built into the here and now.

mistybison said:Even with this belief or realization, you still insist there is something one MUST and SHOULD do: look inward, sit in silence, practice self-reflection, and constantly advise others to do the same.😉

I am sorry that this discussion has drifted off-topic and that there isn't currently a way to revert to the original point. However, this thread didn't start with the vulgarity seen in your previous one, nor was it moved from another subforum for being inappropriate. Furthermore, I won't allow personal stories or private chatting here, much like what happened in your last thread where you led the way (which was quite exhausting to moderate). I also hope this doesn't turn into a two-person dialogue between a "teacher" and a "student." There is a specific "Academy" for all of those things. Please refrain from spamming the thread with these kinds of comments, as I will continue to remove them.😛 😁

Let us proceed. 🙂 Who knows where this discussion might lead, though perhaps we will eventually circle back to the beginning.😉

Do you think things would be different if we restarted from scratch, given how wildly differently everyone interprets the topic title? Just the definition of God creates a massive divide between people. For some, it's the ultimate source; for others, it's the manifestation of that source representing the final mystery. There is no "meeting halfway" on that. Conflict is inevitable.

Brenda Cook4 said:So, let's get back to the heart of the matter—is it actually possible to be spiritual without God?

If we’re making that a prerequisite, then maybe we should just scrap the word 'spirituality' altogether (to be honest, I’ve never been a huge fan of that term either) and just call it 'faith.'😁

***
Dear Enzo, I have to say, hiddenpuma75 makes a great point here—when someone is that opinionated, they can hardly start a conversation without it veering off track or getting swallowed up by their own bias.

You really ought to restore his original thread about the futility of philosophy and everything else as its own separate discussion. It just isn't fair to merge them like this.

Let's keep moving. Who knows where this conversation might lead us? We might even end up circling right back to where we started.

That is such a well-put sentiment.

Define spirituality and God for me. To this day, I fail to grasp what people actually mean by "spirituality" outside of mere physical health—which, unfortunately, has nothing to do with any sense of mystery.

If it makes you feel any better, I also felt completely paralyzed. In my attempt to untangle the relationship between freedom and choice, I ended up staring blankly at a shelf of laundry detergent, spiraling into a dozen different distractions. 🤔

Trapped by the sheer number of options. That was precisely my point.

Edward Flores4 said:If we’re operating under the idea that "failing to see an option" and "having no options" are essentially two sides of the same coin—technically speaking—then yeah, those situations definitely exist. Personally, I haven't found myself backed into a corner like that (at least none that I can recall right now), but the world is a massive place... I'd imagine that every once in a while, somewhere out there, choices just vanish entirely.

You’ll know you are truly free when you stop encountering choices altogether; true freedom cannot coexist with even a single option. It always amuses me when people use phrases like "...well, you still have the freedom to choose...". It sounds incredibly shortsighted because, in my view, the two concepts are mutually exclusive. 🙂

Any action taken from the perspective of such a lack of freedom is mere self-delusion, providing nothing more than a false sense of satisfaction and success.

hiddenhound3 said:My question is this: "Does God exist, or does anything else exist, in the absence of humanity?"

God (with a capital "G") does not exist without humans. It is a mere projection of the human mind, born from a desperate attempt to satisfy its own needs and to somehow defeat the inevitability of change that defines life. Even today, people treat the big "G" as a living person without having the slightest clue why.😉

Creative life energy doesn't need to take a physical form to exist.

Morgan Hernandez5 said:I guess I have a feeling you already reacted by "default," because this forum is crawling with guys like you.

I agree with you that the exclusivity I used could be dangerous.
Generalizing isn't great. You gotta stay open to every combo and every bit of info. But... those convictions you're talking about usually belong to people with low IQs and/or an inability to trust their own gut. Saying to "shut off the mind" is just another useless generalization. Why even say that? Shouldn't we be aiming for total inner balance?
If that balance is there, then every judgment (conclusion) carries more weight, because it comes
from a place of being centered. Then there aren't different "paths" or interpretations anymore, just one—mine... which I have to find, obviously, while keeping my perceptions wide open so I can grasp the various "visions" offered and draw my own conclusion. It doesn't have to be yours, but it can change, because we're open to change and we have that balance guiding us forward.
The whole thing really boils down to the fact that we aren't all on the same level, due to different psychological functions and different starting points, so I don't think you should linger or turn around to try and correct someone else's vision. (What I'm doing right now is exactly me trying to correct your visions).
Do I even have the right to do that?
Anyway, that's enough about Sisyphus.

Whatever that was meant to imply, given that you chose to quote my post.

Morgan Hernandez5 said:I guess I have a feeling you already reacted by "default," because this forum is crawling with guys like you.

I agree with you that the exclusivity I used could be dangerous.
Generalizing isn't great. You gotta stay open to every combo and every bit of info. But... those convictions you're talking about usually belong to people with low IQs and/or an inability to trust their own gut. Saying to "shut off the mind" is just another useless generalization. Why even say that? Shouldn't we be aiming for total inner balance?
If that balance is there, then every judgment (conclusion) carries more weight, because it comes
from a place of being centered. Then there aren't different "paths" or interpretations anymore, just one—mine... which I have to find, obviously, while keeping my perceptions wide open so I can grasp the various "visions" offered and draw my own conclusion. It doesn't have to be yours, but it can change, because we're open to change and we have that balance guiding us forward.
The whole thing really boils down to the fact that we aren't all on the same level, due to different psychological functions and different starting points, so I don't think you should linger or turn around to try and correct someone else's vision. (What I'm doing right now is exactly me trying to correct your visions).
Do I even have the right to do that?
Anyway, that's enough about Sisyphus.

The ability to listen is the cornerstone of communication. 😉

I wasn't speaking about the mind in general terms. Why shut it down? Do you truly believe that is even possible?

Morgan Hernandez5 said:I guess I have a feeling you already reacted by "default," because this forum is crawling with guys like you.

I agree with you that the exclusivity I used could be dangerous.
Generalizing isn't great. You gotta stay open to every combo and every bit of info. But... those convictions you're talking about usually belong to people with low IQs and/or an inability to trust their own gut. Saying to "shut off the mind" is just another useless generalization. Why even say that? Shouldn't we be aiming for total inner balance?
If that balance is there, then every judgment (conclusion) carries more weight, because it comes
from a place of being centered. Then there aren't different "paths" or interpretations anymore, just one—mine... which I have to find, obviously, while keeping my perceptions wide open so I can grasp the various "visions" offered and draw my own conclusion. It doesn't have to be yours, but it can change, because we're open to change and we have that balance guiding us forward.
The whole thing really boils down to the fact that we aren't all on the same level, due to different psychological functions and different starting points, so I don't think you should linger or turn around to try and correct someone else's vision. (What I'm doing right now is exactly me trying to correct your visions).
Do I even have the right to do that?
Anyway, that's enough about Sisyphus.

You have the right to try, though unfortunately, I don't deal in visions. They are merely distractions.

Morgan Hernandez5 As stated by:
In your estimation, what was the primary catalyst for the collapse of ancient civilizations?
In my view, those were nothing more than "natural disasters."

It is possible, though I can only speculate. One must account for shifts occurring over tens of thousands of years to identify true patterns in climate change, rather than focusing solely on the last century. Some people seem obsessed with the impact of aerosol sprays and internal combustion engines while they ponder humanity's footprint, all while dreaming up "eco-conscious" job titles that barely exist.

Morgan Hernandez5 said:Yeah, spot on. Really well said. When I read that, I knew we were pretty much on the same page.

So, why do you think all those old civilizations just vanished? I guess there's a million reasons, maybe. People always want a simple answer, but it's probably just a mix of everything hitting them at once. Resources drying up, bad leadership, climate shifts... who knows. It’s messy.
I mean, if you ask me, those were nothing short of "natural disasters."
You can look at the Bible for the whole Great Flood thing, but there's also actual science to back it up. I mean, you’ve got those oceanographers out of France who found freshwater shells sitting right in the Black Sea... plus a bunch of other studies. Just saying.
I guess I'm telling you that the whole Atlantis thing—you know, the idea that it just vanished because of some massive geological shift—is actually legit. It’s right where they say it should be, near the Azores, sitting right over that huge rift on the Atlantic floor. Just a direct result of everything happening deep under the earth throughout history. Maybe.
The planet is still acting up big time. Looking at the data and measurements from the last thirty years, it’s pretty clear things are ramping up. There's more shaking happening, and the volcanic activity just keeps getting more intense... I guess we're seeing it happen in real time.



I guess, looking at the whole mess, I’d still give science a shot. Yeah, it’s all tangled up with religion, politics, and—let's be real—massive amounts of money, but it still helps us move forward and come up with actual ideas.
I guess I just see every kind of exclusion as totally pointless.
Nah, obviously logic and science aren't the only things that matter...
You're not wrong. Throughout all this long-ass history, some people actually managed to adapt because they figured out what you and I already know. That’s how they survived, I guess.

Helping people? Honestly, it feels like Sisyphus pushing that rock up the hill every single day. It’s just endless. Between how stuck people are in their old-school ways, pure human stupidity, and that desperate, selfish need to fit in... it’s a mess. Plus, most people seem to have zero brainpower beyond just seeing, touching, and hearing stuff. I guess it's just a losing battle.
To actually get how you write, you gotta have a high IQ and that ability to see the big picture—like, actual intuition. Not this fragmented, broken-up mess most people deal with. Honestly, that’s basically what humanity is right now: just a bunch of disconnected pieces.
Once I realized my circle was basically crawling with mediocrity—people who struggle to grasp even the small stuff—I decided it’d be straight-up insane to waste even a shred of energy trying to explain the big picture to them. I mean, whatever. Everyone’s got a right to their own opinion, I guess. We should probably respect what people think, even if their takes are totally delusional. Honestly, trying to talk sense into someone or drag them down from whatever cloud they're floating on just feels dishonest. Not worth it.
I’m pretty sure gentlemaker6, placidjackal36, you, and me are all actually on the same page—we just look at things from different angles. I guess that’s actually a good thing, though. Might help us see the full picture.
At the end of the day, none of us would even be hanging out in this thread if it weren't for this stuff. I guess.
People just lost their sense of empathy, I guess. Respect is basically dead at this point. And since most people seem to be lacking both intuition and basic intelligence, I don't even know if I can blame them. Maybe that's just how it is now.
that’s why I think the whole thing is just a total uphill battle.
I mean, personally, I don't think we should let it get us down. We can still work on ourselves, grow, and live out our own visions, I guess.

thanks in advance

To call something a Sisyphus task simply means you hold expectations that you are certain will go unfulfilled. Such expectations—any expectations, really—act as an unnecessary drag, causing the entire eternity of the present moment to be lost in the noise of an internal monologue, leaving reality as nothing more than a faded idea.

And then people actually attempt to find facts to support such an idea, treating it as if it holds any real value.

Morgan Hernandez5 As requested:
To attempt to convince someone of a particular truth and forcibly pull them from their idealized state of mind would be inherently dishonest.
I am convinced that gentlemaker6, placidjackal36, you, and I actually share the same vision, albeit from different perspectives. This is ultimately an advantage, as it allows us to assemble a more complete picture.
Ultimately, this thread wouldn't even exist if it weren't for us.

Preconceptions prevent you from seeing the full picture—one that can never be captured through mere interpolation of our limited perspectives. As long as we rely on snapshots, what we perceive will always fall short of reality. To truly grasp existence, one must open their eyes, listen intently, and silence the internal biases that serve only to discriminate. The moment you settle on a fiction, you freeze the unstoppable flow of events we all inhabit. Any conclusions drawn from such static processing are worthless when applied to a world in constant flux. They are useless when applied to something living.

To quote another member: Analysis is paralysis.

Morgan Hernandez5 said:Yeah, spot on. Really well said. When I read that, I knew we were pretty much on the same page.

So, why do you think all those old civilizations just vanished? I guess there's a million reasons, maybe. People always want a simple answer, but it's probably just a mix of everything hitting them at once. Resources drying up, bad leadership, climate shifts... who knows. It’s messy.
I mean, if you ask me, those were nothing short of "natural disasters."
You can look at the Bible for the whole Great Flood thing, but there's also actual science to back it up. I mean, you’ve got those oceanographers out of France who found freshwater shells sitting right in the Black Sea... plus a bunch of other studies. Just saying.
I guess I'm telling you that the whole Atlantis thing—you know, the idea that it just vanished because of some massive geological shift—is actually legit. It’s right where they say it should be, near the Azores, sitting right over that huge rift on the Atlantic floor. Just a direct result of everything happening deep under the earth throughout history. Maybe.
The planet is still acting up big time. Looking at the data and measurements from the last thirty years, it’s pretty clear things are ramping up. There's more shaking happening, and the volcanic activity just keeps getting more intense... I guess we're seeing it happen in real time.



I guess, looking at the whole mess, I’d still give science a shot. Yeah, it’s all tangled up with religion, politics, and—let's be real—massive amounts of money, but it still helps us move forward and come up with actual ideas.
I guess I just see every kind of exclusion as totally pointless.
Nah, obviously logic and science aren't the only things that matter...
You're not wrong. Throughout all this long-ass history, some people actually managed to adapt because they figured out what you and I already know. That’s how they survived, I guess.

Helping people? Honestly, it feels like Sisyphus pushing that rock up the hill every single day. It’s just endless. Between how stuck people are in their old-school ways, pure human stupidity, and that desperate, selfish need to fit in... it’s a mess. Plus, most people seem to have zero brainpower beyond just seeing, touching, and hearing stuff. I guess it's just a losing battle.
To actually get how you write, you gotta have a high IQ and that ability to see the big picture—like, actual intuition. Not this fragmented, broken-up mess most people deal with. Honestly, that’s basically what humanity is right now: just a bunch of disconnected pieces.
Once I realized my circle was basically crawling with mediocrity—people who struggle to grasp even the small stuff—I decided it’d be straight-up insane to waste even a shred of energy trying to explain the big picture to them. I mean, whatever. Everyone’s got a right to their own opinion, I guess. We should probably respect what people think, even if their takes are totally delusional. Honestly, trying to talk sense into someone or drag them down from whatever cloud they're floating on just feels dishonest. Not worth it.
I’m pretty sure gentlemaker6, placidjackal36, you, and me are all actually on the same page—we just look at things from different angles. I guess that’s actually a good thing, though. Might help us see the full picture.
At the end of the day, none of us would even be hanging out in this thread if it weren't for this stuff. I guess.
People just lost their sense of empathy, I guess. Respect is basically dead at this point. And since most people seem to be lacking both intuition and basic intelligence, I don't even know if I can blame them. Maybe that's just how it is now.
that’s why I think the whole thing is just a total uphill battle.
I mean, personally, I don't think we should let it get us down. We can still work on ourselves, grow, and live out our own visions, I guess.

thanks in advance

If your goal is to exist within your own little vision, then by all means, continue working on yourself, pursuing spiritual growth, and playing those various games the ego likes to play with itself. 🙂

Facts are merely byproducts of thought, which means they never truly represent reality; they only exist within the mental framework that created them. There is a massive disconnect between this "conceptual" world of measurement, analysis, and dissection, and what actually exists. Consequently, treating facts as anything more significant than an imperialistic cosmology—complete with a creator at the apex, or any other model born from such fragmented thinking—is utterly futile.

We don't need to save the planet; we just need to leave it alone. This climate change everyone is screaming about is a natural cycle that happens periodically—we simply need to learn how to adapt to it.

What actually needs help is the individual who fails to realize they are an extension of their environment, and that the conflicts they witness externally are merely reflections of the divisions within themselves. No talk of God, no sacred texts, no spiritual rituals, and certainly no scientific breakthroughs can force you to feel that connection in your bones. On the contrary, forcing belief systems only serves to ensure that you see nothing and you hear nothing. And that is all that matters.

Where exactly is the knowledge in what you're claiming? Where does it actually differ from simply taking someone's word for it?

Working on consciousness is merely an egoic endeavor, as it is only the ego that perceives itself as separate from consciousness and believes it can somehow manipulate it from that perspective.

casualmaker13 said:Basically, consciousness works in layers based on how aware we are and what we’re capable of handling at any given moment. Most people aren't even conscious of themselves, their own breathing, their thoughts, their emotions, or even the environment around them and how they interact with it. They spend most of their lives just drifting through, maybe only truly aware of about 5-10% of what's actually happening.
Through meditation, or pretty much any spiritual practice designed to expand awareness, we start becoming more tuned in to ourselves and everything going on both inside and outside our heads.
As that awareness climbs from 10% toward 100%, new doors start opening. For instance, you might finally face a fear head-on and realize it doesn't have power over you anymore, or you catch yourself making the same old mistakes and just... stop doing them. It’s like that.
Your potential grows, too. You might find you can do things you couldn't before, your memory sharpens, your focus gets better, you handle stress way more easily, and your perception of the world just gets clearer.
Then there are those sudden insights you get during certain meditative states. Things just click—you start understanding who you really are, how the world actually works, and your intuition starts kicking in.
The more progress you make, the more aware you become, uncovering these deep insights and possibilities that were always there, just buried under the surface where you couldn't see or use them.
Once you hit that fifth level of consciousness, it means you're fully aware of yourself, your surroundings, and the interplay between the two, 24 hours a day. At that point, it’s pretty hard to mess up or make a bad call. It brings this massive sense of self-control, knowledge, skill, freedom, and genuine choice.
And honestly, reaching that state just opens up even more room for further growth.

Who established the boundaries for these levels of consciousness or the criteria required to transition from "lower" to "higher" states? Unless you are simply accepting this on faith, how specifically do you perceive these differentiations in consciousness?

What possibilities does a constant 24-hour state create, and where does this notion of "injecting" consciousness to specific levels even come from?

shadowtiger, what exactly does your definition of enlightenment entail?

"Quotation:"

Richard Walker79 As stated by: Enough with the debate, everyone. It isn't leading anywhere; you're all just spinning your wheels.

The entire universe is spinning in circles; how can they possibly remain stationary?

"Quotation:"

Richard Walker79 As stated by: It matters little who is correct. A person is simply too small to know everything, nor can they ever hope to.

Show me that little man! 😉

- Neither the traveler nor the destination truly exists
- The wind blowing and the branches swaying are simply one single process
- Clinging to change is frustrating. Letting go is what sets you free.
- No matter the concept, it is flawed; therefore, kill your "Future." 😉

What kind of practice are you referring to? The one intended to bring you exactly where you already stand? Even the theory I am discussing seems to elude you, as evidenced by this little polar bear parable. The bear simply exists, whereas we are merely what we believe ourselves to be. That "belief" encompasses various concepts forced into the grammatical structures of the language we speak and think in.

Furthermore, a bear's parents don't tell him, "You aren't Tom or Ivo, you're Peter!" And then Peter feels special simply because he isn't everything else. Some say identity is a blow from which many never truly recover.

---

... I agree that the ego is an illusion but that doesn't make it any less dangerous...

so now you're saying ego=illusion??? perhaps, but it is dangerous...

So, is it an illusion or not?

ambereagle642 said:And what exactly is this "famous monstrosity" supposed to be anyway?

It could be anything, really, since everyone’s perception of themselves is different. Imagine you're sitting in a lecture hall at Harvard, chatting with the person behind you, when the professor suddenly snaps, "Focus!" That sudden, sharp jolt of embarrassment you feel? That's the ego.🙂

IMHO, it's just identifying with an image or an idea of oneself as if it were separate from everything else. The ego fails to recognize the push-pull connection between an individual and their environment.

One discusses the destruction of the ego, not this other nonsense. Everything you believe in exists... purely in your own perception, of course. 🙂