CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › placidharbor7 › Posts

Posts by placidharbor7

248 posts shown.

Can spirituality exist without God? in Spirituality ·
hiddenpuma75 said:"Quote:"

How can you possibly know what something is like if you haven't actually experienced it? You're essentially just building up this mental concept of something without ever having had a taste of it.

"Quote:"
Do you really think it’s necessary to rely on everyone else's experiences?
Not at all! I truly believe that someone else's experiences should only be treated as guideposts.
We walk our own paths. We achieve our own goals.Only if we actually give it a shot.
We can't even get off the starting line or actually experience anything if we spend all our time throwing a thousand questions and obstacles in the way like you do.

"Quote:"
So, does it actually make any difference whether you’re a believer in Saint Bernadetta or Jesus? I mean, Jesus explicitly said that the Kingdom of God is within reach for everyone, and he even left us a roadmap on how to get there. It makes me wonder: does being spiritual truly mean being a person of faith—someone who actively works to manifest their core beliefs? Or is spirituality just about settling into a comfortable web of ideas we've spun for ourselves, feeling cozy within our own intellectual cocoons? Or is it something else entirely?
You forgot to mention those followers of the faith who believe we’ve all already reached enlightenment and can just sit back and do nothing. It's that specific kind of belief system that hits you with a thousand questions the moment you actually try to step out of the cave.
It feels to me like you practice that faith with incredible intensity.

To truly experience—to actually live and breathe—what you set out to achieve, mere belief just isn't enough. In my eyes, there is only one way to make it happen: you have to step out of the cave.

To the sun! 🙂

But it certainly doesn't look like you're intensely practicing any kind of "spiritual dullness."
In the "prologue" of his own story regarding the pursuit of The Great Enlightenment of the Western World, placidharbor7 quoted the very same teacher you just brought up—Raman Maharshi.

Didn't Master Raman say: "ENLIGHTENMENT is also my COW"?

I just cannot wrap my head around how Master Raman and the "non-master" Nisargadatta could possibly share the exact same (un)mindset!

For the love of God, please, give us some of that grand master-level wisdom and explain: how can ENLIGHTENMENT be a common cow, while VO is definitely not?!
Can spirituality exist without God? in Spirituality ·
Joseph Ramos11 said:Do you honestly think N. M. feels that way? I don't. He said that out of pure pity. He knows the questioner can't wrap their head around the fact that free will doesn't exist in any capacity whatsoever, but what's the point in hitting them over the head with that right away?
He’s just feeding him enough to swallow at once, otherwise why would N. M. even bother talking to him? Before a real conversation can even start, this person has to agree to certain compromises... otherwise, a dialogue wouldn't be possible at all.

Let's bring this ball back down to "earth" for a second.
Even if everything you're saying is true, making a "concession" like that to a flesh-and-blood The Seeker causes a million times more damage "after the fact" than any supposed "benefit" provides to N. M.'s interlocutor.

When we look at these kinds of "calculations," isn't it worth reflecting on the massive difference between a living teacher and dead letters on a page?

It’s a different pair of shoes entirely! placidharbor7 "thinks" and knows that a truly awakened teacher wouldn't dream of such an impropriety. They would hold back, or perhaps simply remain silent on the "heavier" passages.

Only a false teacher would "starve" The Seeker's intellect by withholding the truth during direct contact. For those who understand, direct work with a student is the very pinnacle of mastery.
Nisargadatta doesn't KNOW, so in this case, we aren't looking at a "concession," but rather at
the limits of the teacher's spiritual reach. You're being a bit shallow here, Joseph Ramos11.
Can spirituality exist without God? in Spirituality ·
hiddenpuma75 said:But let's be honest—it isn't quite that simple. Some people are just wired to evolve.
It feels like you’ve artificially split everything into two extremes just to limit the options, all in an attempt to avoid taking the plunge. By constantly questioning every move, you’re essentially undermining anyone who actually wants to dive into the deep end and step out of their comfort zone.

Quincy:
But what if it isn't?
What would our collective state of "enlightenment" even look like if we had never been exposed to that one salesman and his aunt with all their endless stories?
If we didn't have this place to hang out, we’d probably just be sleeping all day or spending our lives endlessly typing away in some lonely cave.
Anyone who ever catches a glimpse of an exit from this digital cave we’re all stuck in? They’ll never forget it, and they’ll spend every waking moment trying to find their way out. That’s just how this game is programmed. We've got all sorts of characters in here, too.
It feels like your whole persona is hardwired to loop through endless, trivial questions just to avoid actually stepping out into the real world. Meanwhile, I seem to be programmed to tell everyone exactly how much I want to get out there and experience it all.
And that’s that.

Quincy:
It feels like, when you strip everything else away, it all eventually boils down to FAITH. 🙂
Look, I wasn't even trying to dispute that! I truly believe there is a whole world existing outside the "cave" of this forum, yet you and many others seem determined to cloud the issue, preferring to stay tucked away in here and just keep posting. I only take issue with your claim that you and all these other armchair philosophers... You know. If there were no hope to hold onto—if everything you’ve achieved was truly the end of the road—I’d be in trouble. But my belief is that while your knowledge is incredible, it’s the faith that actually carries us through. It takes both.

Quincy:
But what if we look at it this way: 1... 2... 3... ?
You can ask a thousand questions if you want, but at this point, none of them really matter.
The only thing that actually matters is why you’re choosing to stay holed up in that cave.

The reason is simple.

There are really only three reasons why anyone would ever want to leave the cave and step out into the light.

First off, it’s all about having empathy for the struggles of others. Honestly, people like that are few and far between.
Let’s be honest: you, me, and everyone else reading this are just as callous and hypocritical as anyone else. We see someone else's suffering, and frankly, we don't let it move us one bit.
The proof is right there in how we can just sit here, blissfully enjoying our lunch, completely unbothered while thousands of people elsewhere are suffering through starvation at this very same moment.

If we were truly enlightened—and I’m certainly not talking about those people who pretend to be while just looking down on everyone else—we would actually feel the weight of other people's suffering. 😉
It’s not just about what we say—it’s much deeper than that. We aren't just failing to speak up; we're actively pushing others around and being disrespectful. 👎

The second reason? It’s our own suffering.

Thirdly—and this is actually the positive part—there’s the element of scientific curiosity. It’s that deep-seated drive to find answers to the big questions: Who are we? What exactly are we made of? And where on earth are we all heading?

----------------------------------------

This whole game—this entire stretch of history—is really just a clash between those who say yes and those who say no. 😉

Aside from that one shady dealer who claims, "You can't control the future unless it's strictly technical matters."

Sorry, buddy, but you're missing the forest for the trees on this one!
Can spirituality exist without God? in Spirituality ·
hiddenpuma75 said:I’d like to share a dialogue from what I consider to be one of the most important books in existence, if not the most important. 😲

I AM THAT - by NISARGADATTA MAHARAJ

Conversations with a cigarette vendor from New York City—a man who reached "the other shore."

*****

Fisherman: How can I plan my life using my free will?

Nisargadatta: Why bother planning? Questions like that just reveal inner tension.
Realize that you aren't the master of everything that unfolds.
You can't control the future, except perhaps in purely technical matters.
----------------------------------------------------------------
P: I agree, I'm certainly not the master of all that happens. More like a slave.

NM: Don't be the master, and don't be the slave. Just remain detached.
------------------------------------------------------

P: Does that mean avoiding action altogether?

NM: YOU CANNOT AVOID ACTION. It happens, just like everything else.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

P: But surely I can control my own decisions and choices!
NM: Try it. YOU WILL SOON DISCOVER THAT YOU ARE DOING WHAT YOU MUST.

----------------------------------------------------------

P: But I am able to act according to my free will.

NM. YOU ONLY KNOW YOUR WILL AFTER YOU HAVE ALREADY ACTED.

----------------------------------------------------------------

P: What if I simply remember my desires and decisions, and then act accordingly?

NM: In that case, it is your memory deciding, NOT YOU.
-----------------------------------------------------

P: But doesn't free will actually exist? Am I not free to want things? 😢

NM: Oh, no. You are compelled to want. Did you know that in Hinduism, the very idea of free will doesn't even exist—to the point that the language doesn't even have a word for it!
Will is just attachment; it is fixation. It is a bond.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

P: Then I am free to choose my own boundaries.

NM: First, you have to be free. To be free within the world, you must be free FROM the world. Otherwise, your past is making the decisions for you. You find yourself trapped between what happened and what must happen. You might call that fate or KARMA, but it is never what you call it—freedom.
First, you must return to your true self (experience who you really are—self-realization), and only then can you act from the heart of pure love.

The mind can only help you identify what isn't true. But if you want real, positive knowledge, you have to move beyond the mind. The Absolute is that which transcends the mind.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

P:
Is there anything in the entire universe that is truly worth anything?

NM: Yes. The power of love. 🙂

Grooooooooooooooo - ho - ho - ho - hot - hot - hot...
grooooooooooooooo - ho - ho - ho - hot - hot - hot...

Just one single thought—but a perfectly sufficient amount of CORPUS DELICTI—to let a New York City chimney sweep know exactly as much as an invisible mole underground!
When people mistake a mere "glimpse" for the ultimate truth, why on earth would you be surprised by Ma Gangaja or L. Cohen? Besides, placidharbor7 warned us about both those "gangsters" (get it? "GANG-aji," "L. COIN") a long time ago!

Our esteemed moderator, please know that placidharbor7 kindly declines to mix this chaotic mess of shamanic ignorance and cheap tricks with his dignified school of thought.
Let someone else take over this thread for "Ljubi"; even his mentor, Master Pathotepa, was busy cleaning up both of them right here years ago—hiddenpuma7 knows the score. Shamantrika, go find that record!
Can spirituality exist without God? in Spirituality ·
hiddenpuma75 said:"Quote:"

I’m with you on this one. I’d go so far as to say we’re actually standing on very similar ground, even if we’re using different metaphors to describe it.

I have a few questions:

How do you personally process—or even react to—those people who insist there’s always "something more"? You know the type: they claim that our understanding, whether it's mine, yours, or anyone else's, can never truly be the final destination. Even when things finally seem to settle, they argue we haven't reached the end. What's your take on that?
That’s exactly what I’ve been trying to drive home in my recent posts.

I’m just drifting through this world—or maybe I'm more like a leaf, tossed about by whatever breeze decides to pick up. 😁 I recently stumbled upon some profound insights from Buddha, along with some teachings from a cigarette vendor in Mumbai named Nisargadatta. Then there’s this woman, Bernadette, who claims she can see what lies beyond—insisting that they all exist in "that place" somewhere else.
They aren't exactly saying there’s anything wrong with you just because you decided to take a break while someone else keeps pushing through their practice.
But they can testify to it—to that actual realization, that direct experience of "THAT."
It’s pretty telling how they both use the exact same language and descriptions. It’s the exact same situation. Even though they’ve never actually met.
Some people would argue that this whole reality we’re living in—you, me, and everyone else who isn't "over there"—is nothing more than one big, beautiful illusion.
It’s something everyone eventually has to face, simply because the game is rigged from the start.

2) There are certain people, particularly here in the States, who literally... For sale. So, here’s my take on your "understanding"—that whole idea of "stopping." It feels a bit like you're selling this concept that everything is already fine and you can just... stop and exist. Like, you don't even need to bother with any specific techniques because you've essentially already arrived.

It all started with Alan Watts, but these days, it’s turned into a full-blown industry. You've got guys like Andrew Cohen, Gangaji, and Satyam Nadeen leading the charge—along with a whole host of others popping up like mushrooms after a heavy rain on the American spiritual marketplace.

Just to be clear, they aren't claiming to be one and the same. Special. They actually achieved more than just putting things on hold and trying to make sense of it all.

My three main witnesses—Buddha, Nisargadatta, and Aunt Bernadette—wouldn't hesitate to back me up on this one.
What if there’s actually something more to discover once we move past the stage of understanding and finally learn how to just stop?

So, you're suggesting we just ditch the techniques altogether? Alright, I hear you. I think I'm starting to see where you're coming from.
But how exactly are you going to respond to that latest riddle from the Sphinx?

Isn't choosing to stay out of politics actually a political stance in itself?
In other words...

Isn't non-doing actually its own kind of technique? I mean, just like any other method, choosing to step back and let things be is a deliberate form of action in itself. 🙂

Does anyone have any thoughts on this? I'd love to hear your take.

Who would these people even try to fool if those who actually go FURTHER could prove just one single detail of their DISTANT experience? And wouldn't that detail, naturally, have to be VASTLY different from the trivial experiences of everyone else who is merely "spiritually" CEASED?

The thing is, there isn't a shred of direct or indirect evidence of such details in Buddha, nor in Nisargadatta, nor in the honorable Auntie Bernadette (just look at placidharbor7's takes on the three of them)—so honestly, it doesn't matter which side is arguing.

A true Seeker doesn't just take anyone's word for it. When it comes to the unquestionable awakening of a spiritual role model, the stakes are even higher! In those cases, the Seeker literally has nothing to grasp at, because neither the subject nor the "vibe" is even tuned to that particular OCTAVE.

Trying to sniff out the hollow "otherworldly" experiences of others is nothing more than PRETENTIOUSNESS.
"But it doesn't matter, just keep doing your own thing," say the naive interlocutors.
Can spirituality exist without God? in Spirituality ·
Edward Flores4 said:Man, you must be a total gutter rat according to your horoscope. It’s basically scientific proof that ambition and actual talent always move in opposite directions. 🙄

placidharbor7, it's not slugs—it's caterpillars!
Can spirituality exist without God? in Spirituality ·
Edward Flores4 said:You aren't a duck! 😁

Pache, even with you bringing up Lao Tzu in your "signature," you’re basically serving up a plain hot dog without any mustard:

"The universe is the unity of all things. If one recognizes his identity with this unity, then the parts of his body mean no more to him than so much dirt, and death and life, end and beginning, disturb his tranquillity no more than the succession of day and night."

Of course, "his tranquility" isn't being disturbed by anything, because the wise man hasn't actually transcended the very reason he describes himself as having "his IDENTITY with this unity."

Dozens of Seekers on this forum grasp that "they" and date one are one and the same, only to fall right back into nothingness. Somewhere else, there's always a hidden catch lying in wait.
Can spirituality exist without God? in Spirituality ·
Edward Flores4 said:How am I supposed to define something that doesn't even exist? I’m talking about something I can't physically feel, something that gives me zero indicators, and absolutely no way to measure or point to it using any kind of data or sensory input. It's like trying to describe a color that hasn't been invented yet—how do you even begin to put words to a complete void?

Responding to someone using their full legal name feels like such a strange social convention to me—it’s basically just a tool we use to make sure we're actually talking to the right person, keeps things organized, and makes life easier for whoever is crunching the numbers for various statistics. But honestly? I don't feel like my name is some core part of my identity. It’s more like a handshake or a basic social contract that I follow just to keep things running smoothly in public.

To be honest, my thoughts aren't even really mine... I used to think I was the one in control of them, but once you start looking closely at how things actually work, you realize that thought is the primary driver—experience is just secondary. Thought is absolute, whereas experience is always relative. And the same logic applies to the "person" having those experiences; the "I" only exists in a relative sense. I didn't just pop into existence out of thin air. Whatever it is that I actually originated from—whatever that source might be—that thing is absolute. It’s the primary reality. You could call it the Mother of all Mothers, the Absolute, the Void, or whatever terminology fits your perspective, but that's where the truth lies.

To be honest, before I really sat with this, I used to walk around thinking that "I" was the one doing all the thinking—you know, that little voice in my head driving the bus. But lately, I’ve come to realize that whole idea is just a total illusion. It’s like looking at a reflection in a moving stream and thinking you can grab it; you just can't identify the thought process with the "self"... or maybe, if we're being precise, it works the other way around. But here's the kicker: if you actually manage to identify that "I" with the Absolute, the entire mechanism of identification just... stops. It’s done. Think of it like a metamorphosis—this process where the subject (the "me" I thought I knew) transforms into a transcendental object (the Absolute). Once you truly see that you *are* the Absolute, the need to identify disappears because there's no longer a separate identity left to cling to. Everything else just falls away, leaving nothing behind but a pure point of awareness.

Awareness itself isn't really some kind of "output" from my hard work—it’s not something I manufacture. Think about it this way: if someone walks into a room carrying an umbrella, provided you actually see the person and the umbrella, can you really *not* be aware of that umbrella entering the space? Of course you can't. So, being aware of my surroundings isn't some product of intense mental effort or focused labor; it’s just a spontaneous interpretation of the shifts happening around me. In a sense, I’m more like a mirror—just a surface reflecting all the changes occurring in my environment. Now, the way we interpret those changes can be totally arbitrary, but it’s also unavoidable. It becomes arbitrary because we tend to mess it up through various levels of denial or by projecting our own stuff onto what we see. But if we could reach that ideal state—where we aren't denying what's right in front of us and aren't projecting our subconscious onto reality—then awareness of the environment is simply a consequence of change itself. And that’s something I can't even claim as "me."

Self-awareness—or what people usually call "self-awareness"—is really just a matter of resonance. Think of consciousness like a mirror; the second that consciousness catches its own reflection, you get self-awareness. It’s not some achievement you can grind for or a product of sheer willpower, either. It's more like pure interference between your consciousness and your perception—kind of like two waves overlapping to create a new pattern. And even then, once you peel back the layers, there isn't really anything left for me to actually latch onto or identify with.

After doing a little bit of "internal inspection," I’ve come to a pretty significant conclusion—consciousness isn't some sort of phenomenon that just pops up "inside" me. Instead, it feels more like the very foundation that I was built upon; it's likely the underlying substrate for my entire existence. Think of it this way: the different segments of our existence basically vary based on how much mobility they have and their general capacity to interact with everything around them. That capacity for interaction includes the ability to make choices when multiple options are on the table—which is exactly what we call free will. In my view, the choices and decisions I make are really the only things I can truly claim as "mine," and because of that, I take full responsibility for them. So, if I’m digging deep to explore the concept of "self," those specific choices are really the only candidates qualified to hold the title of the "ego." But hey, I’m not just floating in a vacuum here... there's a whole world surrounding me, too... and we definitely need to keep that in the equation, right?

So, if consciousness is really the "foundation" of everything, then I’m sharing that same "foundation" with the entirety of existence. Let’s try a metaphor—think of a massive Oak tree, and let's say my "self" is just a single leaf on that tree. Every individual leaf has its own "sense" of being itself and the ability to make decisions on a "local" level. A leaf can turn toward the sunlight, and if enough other leaves decide to turn toward the light, the whole branch will eventually pivot toward the sun. As a leaf, I might think I’m "individual" (in *individuum*—meaning divided) and experience myself as a persona (from *personae*—a voice through a mask, a dramatic mask), making choices that might actually end up hurting the tree as a whole. But since I share this "foundation" with every other leaf, every branch, the bark, the trunk, and the roots... well, that would be pretty foolish. When I make a decision, I have to account for all the other segments of my immediate surroundings that I share a foundation with. This means the "entity" I’m actually deciding in whose interest is much, much larger than this little "leaf" I physically feel like—my very survival is tied directly to the rest of the tree. In other words, I am just one of many "conscious points" on the same tree. If an "I" exists, that "I" IS the entire tree.

Just like my liver doesn't perceive my eyeball, even though they both belong to one single human organism—similarly, I am just one conscious part of the absolute consciousness that serves as the "foundation" of its own existence.

There we go... instead of giving you a dry definition of the ego, I’ve laid out a full analogy to explain why I hold the views I mentioned earlier. If you spot any flaws in that logic, I’d honestly love to sit down and hash it out with you. But as you can see, my perspective doesn't allow me to define what you call the "ego" or claim to possess it—because when I look at "myself," I simply don't find it there.

1) The concept of verifying a claim is fundamentally different from the concept of "becoming" something other than what you already are. I said that the idea of "becoming" something is an ego trip. Verifying someone else's claim (no matter what that claim is) is something else entirely. "Becoming" something and "discovering" what you truly are aren't even similar, let alone comparable concepts.

2) What kind of technique can you use to gradually wake up? How long does it take you to wake up after sleeping? One moment you're asleep, and the next you're awake... probably still groggy, sure, but awake nonetheless. There are no techniques for waking up. You just have to want to wake up RIGHT NOW. No preparation, no specific methods, and no waiting around for a period of change. Transformation is instantaneous; it doesn't require time.

If that's true, then even those thoughts that are supposedly "observing" the illusion aren't yours either!
It’s just pure chaos inside—thoughts that aren't "you," mixed in with the ones that still feel like they are. Isn't that right, truth seeker?
Can spirituality exist without God? in Spirituality ·
Brenda Cook4 said:My point is that emptiness isn't the ultimate essence of reality—it's not an absolute. Think about it: if we treat emptiness as an object and try to pin down its core, we’ll find that it too is devoid of any inherent existence (form is emptiness / if we look at it without our own personal biases / — emptiness is form), leaving us with nothing but the emptiness of emptiness itself.

Furthermore, I'd argue there’s no objective distinction between samsara and nirvana. They are two sides of the same coin, viewed from different angles—one through the lens of ignorance and the other through enlightenment. Neither depends on anything "out there"; it’s purely a matter of perspective. These conventional and ultimate truths aren't contradictions; they complement one another perfectly.

...just my two cents regarding Nagarjuna🙂....

It's a bit tricky, isn't it? Because this whole mental knot involves way too much overthinking.

In the way the Masters talk about Nagarjuna, the whole elaboration basically boils down to three little words: I DON'T KNOW, yet I DO.

In that kind of mindset, you don't find "samsara," or "nirvana," or "truth," or "the absolute," or "inherence," or even "existence"...

Nothing is being compared here; the bottom line is that everything is one, without any definitions. In a universe without definitions, there are no definitions within the mind either. That is the approach of the Masters, and it might very well be Nagarjuna's sunyata.

It's extremely, extremely, extremely simple.
Can spirituality exist without God? in Spirituality ·
Edward Flores4 said:Honestly, I’m just sitting here in awe of your ego.👍

Well then, go ahead... since you find it so easy.

You aren't a duck😁

Wait, did you actually convince yourself that you're a horse?😍

Edward Flores4 said:Honestly, I’m just sitting here in awe of your ego.👍

Well then, go ahead... since you find it so easy.

You aren't a duck😁

Maybe you should just work yourself until you're exhausted—it might stop you from overextending yourself so much.😲

Edward Flores4 said:Honestly, I’m just sitting here in awe of your ego.👍

Well then, go ahead... since you find it so easy.

You aren't a duck😁

Keep peeling those layers away until you reach the bare truth of a true Master.👍
Can spirituality exist without God? in Spirituality ·
Brenda Cook4 said:That’s put perfectly.....sunyata-sunyata...

....in the end, we aren't absolutely confirming nor absolutely denying the existence of the self...that’s the middle way, the path between extremes...and one more thing: sunyata doesn't negate the conditioned world; it only negates the mistake of treating it as absolute. Just because you realize the sunya-nature doesn't mean the relative/conditioned world disappears—it just means ignorance is destroyed...

Since the undivided reality isn't ultimately separate from the divided, and since the core nature of the conditioned is actually the unconditioned, those who are wise don't abandon the world. They don't cling to nirvana as if it were something distinct from samsara.

Sometimes even placidharbor7 misses the mark on things they actually love; I guess this is one of those moments.

Could you perhaps be so kind as to say this in plain, natural American English? It would definitely bring more joy to the souls hanging out here!
Can spirituality exist without God? in Spirituality ·
"Quote:"
Edward Flores4 said:It’s actually kind of funny how you don't even realize a statement is coming from the exact same person you were just agreeing with—unless they actually put their name on it (like this one with the flaw in it).

You're being pretty pathetic here, honestly, I almost feel bad for you... but okay, jokes aside... keep up the great work, champ.

Who was placidharbor7 agreeing with just now? Seriously, didn't he just give that lucky guy an incredibly generous breakdown of the whole situation?!

A true Master stands far above mere words. When they actually choose to speak, they do so with such purpose—it’s like they're intentionally sparking a search within you! They have this incredible, effortless knack for looking at a piece of work and instantly knowing exactly what is a pure diamond and what is just worthless straw. Isn't that a remarkable gift?

Edward Flores4 said:It’s actually kind of funny how you don't even realize a statement is coming from the exact same person you were just agreeing with—unless they actually put their name on it (like this one with the flaw in it).

You're being pretty pathetic here, honestly, I almost feel bad for you... but okay, jokes aside... keep up the great work, champ.

Is there anything easier than taking a donkey out for a ride? I mean, they’re so short, aren't they?

P.S.: So, if we're all claiming that the "ego" is just an illusion, I have to ask—who exactly inside you is the one experiencing that illusion? Who is the "you" that’s doing the realizing?
Can spirituality exist without God? in Spirituality ·
Edward Flores4 said:

Damn... that was actually incredibly profound. I'm genuinely impressed.

Look, you’re missing out on so much potential because you’re pouring all your energy into the performance—all that unnecessary drama and playing a part—instead of just picking up a shovel and actually digging in. If you’d stop worrying about how things look and just get to work, you might actually leave a meaningful mark on this world.

I really need to address this specific point—it’s one of those things that keeps coming up, and I think it deserves a bit more breathing room than we've given it. When you look at the core of what we're discussing here, it isn't just about the surface-level details; it's about how those pieces fit into the larger picture. It reminds me of how a master carpenter doesn't just focus on a single nail, but rather on how the tension in the wood affects the entire structure of the house. If you miss that fundamental connection, the whole thing starts to feel a little off, right? So, taking this idea into account, let's try to peel back the layers a bit more. We shouldn't just accept the initial premise at face value—we have to dig into why it matters in the first place. It’s easy to get caught up in the weeds, but if we take a step back, we can see how these individual threads weave together into something much more substantial. It’s about looking for that underlying rhythm, that sense of cohesion that makes everything click.

You think I’m just giving you some clunky, half-baked translation that clearly went right over your head?

Here’s some food for thought to chew on:

There’s a massive difference between being humble enough to admit when you're out of your depth and being completely oblivious to the fact that you have no clue what's going on. To me, realizing you don't understand something—actually sitting with that uncertainty—is a genuine virtue. It's the starting point for everything. On the flip side, failing to realize you're lost? That’s just a fundamental flaw. It’s like driving through a thick fog in the middle of Nebraska without a GPS; if you don't realize you can't see the road, you're just heading straight for a ditch. Awareness is everything.

Look, innocence and enlightenment—those aren't things you can just hand out like flyers on a street corner; they live entirely within your own head. You shouldn't be trying to force those states of being onto anyone else. And honestly, if you can manage it, try not to be a hypocrite—it’s a losing game that only serves to inflate that massive, tangible ego of yours. I’m starting to suspect you actually felt it during a rectal exam. 😁

I’ve been thinking a lot about this lately—how we tend to get caught up in the noise of everything happening around us—and I wanted to share a few thoughts on that specific point. It’s funny, isn't it? We spend so much energy trying to untangle these massive, complex problems, almost like we're trying to solve a Rubik's Cube while someone is shaking the table underneath us. But sometimes, if you step back and look at the bigger picture—much like how you might view a sprawling cityscape from a high-rise window in Chicago rather than getting lost in the grit of a single alleyway—you realize that the solution isn't more effort, but better perspective. There's a certain kind of mental clutter we all deal with—that constant hum of "what ifs" and "should haves"—that acts like static on a radio station. You can try to turn the volume up to hear the music better, but all you're really doing is making the static louder. It reminds me of that old idea about original sin—not in a religious sense, necessarily, but just that inherent tendency we have to stumble over our own feet before we even start running. If we could just find a way to quiet that internal static—to find that bit of clarity amidst the chaos—everything else starts to fall into place. It’s less about forcing a result and more about creating the right environment for things to happen naturally. It’s a slow process, sure, and definitely not as instant as a click of a button, but I think it's the only way to actually make progress that sticks.

I’m really not interested in engaging with anyone who sidesteps my actual points or just flat-out ignores the questions I’ve already asked—it makes for a pretty pointless conversation. Maybe this hasn't quite clicked for you yet, so let me lay it out one more time...
Keep on talking, pal, until you actually learn how to communicate without being such a hypocrite—you know, all that theatrical, condescending nonsense. Honestly, I don't need any of your little sparks in the dark, and frankly, I couldn't care less about them either.
Damn... that was actually incredibly profound. I'm genuinely impressed.

Look, you’re missing out on so much potential because you’re pouring all your energy into the performance—all that unnecessary drama and playing a part—instead of just picking up a shovel and actually digging in. If you’d stop worrying about how things look and just get to work, you might actually leave a meaningful mark on this world.

I really need to address this specific point—it’s one of those things that keeps coming up, and I think it deserves a bit more breathing room than we've given it. When you look at the core of what we're discussing here, it isn't just about the surface-level details; it's about how those pieces fit into the larger picture. It reminds me of how a master carpenter doesn't just focus on a single nail, but rather on how the tension in the wood affects the entire structure of the house. If you miss that fundamental connection, the whole thing starts to feel a little off, right? So, taking this idea into account, let's try to peel back the layers a bit more. We shouldn't just accept the initial premise at face value—we have to dig into why it matters in the first place. It’s easy to get caught up in the weeds, but if we take a step back, we can see how these individual threads weave together into something much more substantial. It’s about looking for that underlying rhythm, that sense of cohesion that makes everything click.

You think I’m just giving you some clunky, half-baked translation that clearly went right over your head?

Here’s some food for thought to chew on:

There’s a massive difference between being humble enough to admit when you're out of your depth and being completely oblivious to the fact that you have no clue what's going on. To me, realizing you don't understand something—actually sitting with that uncertainty—is a genuine virtue. It's the starting point for everything. On the flip side, failing to realize you're lost? That’s just a fundamental flaw. It’s like driving through a thick fog in the middle of Nebraska without a GPS; if you don't realize you can't see the road, you're just heading straight for a ditch. Awareness is everything.

Look, innocence and enlightenment—those aren't things you can just hand out like flyers on a street corner; they live entirely within your own head. You shouldn't be trying to force those states of being onto anyone else. And honestly, if you can manage it, try not to be a hypocrite—it’s a losing game that only serves to inflate that massive, tangible ego of yours. I’m starting to suspect you actually felt it during a rectal exam. 😁

I’ve been thinking a lot about this lately—how we tend to get caught up in the noise of everything happening around us—and I wanted to share a few thoughts on that specific point. It’s funny, isn't it? We spend so much energy trying to untangle these massive, complex problems, almost like we're trying to solve a Rubik's Cube while someone is shaking the table underneath us. But sometimes, if you step back and look at the bigger picture—much like how you might view a sprawling cityscape from a high-rise window in Chicago rather than getting lost in the grit of a single alleyway—you realize that the solution isn't more effort, but better perspective. There's a certain kind of mental clutter we all deal with—that constant hum of "what ifs" and "should haves"—that acts like static on a radio station. You can try to turn the volume up to hear the music better, but all you're really doing is making the static louder. It reminds me of that old idea about original sin—not in a religious sense, necessarily, but just that inherent tendency we have to stumble over our own feet before we even start running. If we could just find a way to quiet that internal static—to find that bit of clarity amidst the chaos—everything else starts to fall into place. It’s less about forcing a result and more about creating the right environment for things to happen naturally. It’s a slow process, sure, and definitely not as instant as a click of a button, but I think it's the only way to actually make progress that sticks.

I’m really not interested in engaging with anyone who sidesteps my actual points or just flat-out ignores the questions I’ve already asked—it makes for a pretty pointless conversation. Maybe this hasn't quite clicked for you yet, so let me lay it out one more time...
Keep on talking, pal, until you actually learn how to communicate without being such a hypocrite—you know, all that theatrical, condescending nonsense. Honestly, I don't need any of your little sparks in the dark, and frankly, I couldn't care less about them either.
Honestly, calling it a "defect" is just a fancy way of describing original sin; you might want to sit with that for a while.

A seeker stands almost no chance of actually "realizing they haven't realized anything."
placidharbor7 is clearly talking about "the last REALIZATION."

P.S.: On a side note, if you claim the "ego" is just an illusion, then tell us—where, specifically, within you does this illusion live?
Can spirituality exist without God? in Spirituality ·
Edward Flores4 said:Basically, you can’t actually defend the idea of "existence," yet you still insist you're right and somehow expect me to take you seriously... oh, please, Mr. Expert.😁

If you had actually realized anything, you'd be able to explain it. Save those tired lines about how things "can't be proven" for someone else. If you were truly living on both "levels" at once, you’d know how to carry yourself—you wouldn't go around broadcasting your dual existence to everyone while expecting us to treat you like some sort of guru. One of the main traits of an awakened person is wanting to help others; your main trait seems to be just being full of yourself.

Come on, drop the hackneyed clichés you trot out every fifth post. Every single time someone asks you a question you can't answer, you swoop in with one of those "deep" counter-questions straight out of a preschool version of Zen for Dummies.🙄

If you don't have an answer, don't try to hide behind flimsy excuses or transparent little diversions meant to distract from the fact that you haven't a clue what you're rambling about. There is nothing I can't stand more than these self-appointed, self-proclaimed "spiritual authorities"—they're basically just spiritual con artists.

At the end of the day, everyone just does what they can, right? We all have our own limits, our own capacity, and our own way of handling things based on what we're able to give. It really just comes down to how much each person can manage!


Edward Flores4 said:Basically, you can’t actually defend the idea of "existence," yet you still insist you're right and somehow expect me to take you seriously... oh, please, Mr. Expert.😁

If you had actually realized anything, you'd be able to explain it. Save those tired lines about how things "can't be proven" for someone else. If you were truly living on both "levels" at once, you’d know how to carry yourself—you wouldn't go around broadcasting your dual existence to everyone while expecting us to treat you like some sort of guru. One of the main traits of an awakened person is wanting to help others; your main trait seems to be just being full of yourself.

Come on, drop the hackneyed clichés you trot out every fifth post. Every single time someone asks you a question you can't answer, you swoop in with one of those "deep" counter-questions straight out of a preschool version of Zen for Dummies.🙄

If you don't have an answer, don't try to hide behind flimsy excuses or transparent little diversions meant to distract from the fact that you haven't a clue what you're rambling about. There is nothing I can't stand more than these self-appointed, self-proclaimed "spiritual authorities"—they're basically just spiritual con artists.

See? You finally get it! It’s like you’re starting to realize just how much you can actually accomplish when everything clicks. Isn't it amazing when that lightbulb moment finally hits?

Edward Flores4 said:Basically, you can’t actually defend the idea of "existence," yet you still insist you're right and somehow expect me to take you seriously... oh, please, Mr. Expert.😁

If you had actually realized anything, you'd be able to explain it. Save those tired lines about how things "can't be proven" for someone else. If you were truly living on both "levels" at once, you’d know how to carry yourself—you wouldn't go around broadcasting your dual existence to everyone while expecting us to treat you like some sort of guru. One of the main traits of an awakened person is wanting to help others; your main trait seems to be just being full of yourself.

Come on, drop the hackneyed clichés you trot out every fifth post. Every single time someone asks you a question you can't answer, you swoop in with one of those "deep" counter-questions straight out of a preschool version of Zen for Dummies.🙄

If you don't have an answer, don't try to hide behind flimsy excuses or transparent little diversions meant to distract from the fact that you haven't a clue what you're rambling about. There is nothing I can't stand more than these self-appointed, self-proclaimed "spiritual authorities"—they're basically just spiritual con artists.

What does placidharbor7 actually know about Zen? He gave you a little hint about Nagarjuna—are you still not catching on to what he’s getting at?

I’m looking at this Quote, and honestly, isn't it fascinating how much weight a single sentence can carry? It really makes you stop and think about where we stand right now!
Edward Flores4 said:Basically, you can’t actually defend the idea of "existence," yet you still insist you're right and somehow expect me to take you seriously... oh, please, Mr. Expert.😁

If you had actually realized anything, you'd be able to explain it. Save those tired lines about how things "can't be proven" for someone else. If you were truly living on both "levels" at once, you’d know how to carry yourself—you wouldn't go around broadcasting your dual existence to everyone while expecting us to treat you like some sort of guru. One of the main traits of an awakened person is wanting to help others; your main trait seems to be just being full of yourself.

Come on, drop the hackneyed clichés you trot out every fifth post. Every single time someone asks you a question you can't answer, you swoop in with one of those "deep" counter-questions straight out of a preschool version of Zen for Dummies.🙄

If you don't have an answer, don't try to hide behind flimsy excuses or transparent little diversions meant to distract from the fact that you haven't a clue what you're rambling about. There is nothing I can't stand more than these self-appointed, self-proclaimed "spiritual authorities"—they're basically just spiritual con artists.

Look, this whole idea of "mutual aid" is strictly something you're making up in your own head—it doesn't exist anywhere else! Why on earth would you try to pin that label on people who haven't done anything wrong?

By the way, if you’re really claiming that the "ego" is just some big illusion, then help me out here—who exactly is being fooled by that clumsy little delusion?
Can spirituality exist without God? in Spirituality ·
Edward Flores4 said:Look, since you're out here claiming the ego actually exists, the burden of proof is squarely on your shoulders. We can't see the ego directly—you know, through basic sight—and we certainly can't detect it indirectly via any modern tech, like an MRI, a CT scan, or even an X-ray. So, if you're arguing it doesn't exist, you don't really need to provide evidence. But the moment you step up and claim the ego *is* a real thing, then it’s your job to solve the whole dilemma of how we define a "reliable metric" for existence versus non-existence.

And since you're clearly a bit of an expert on these matters... I'm sure you'll have no trouble figuring that out.

By the way—what is this "ego" supposed to be, anyway?

The problem here is that the people arguing are only looking at things through the lens of "existence."
placidharbor7 had the guts to step up and speak from a place of true mastery, recognizing both "existence" and "non-existence" at once—basically living in both worlds simultaneously!
And honestly, that kind of master-level perspective? You can't just sit there and try to prove it with a spreadsheet. It's just a different way of being.

If you’re telling me the "ego" is just an illusion, then tell me this: who exactly is experiencing the illusion of that clumsiness?
Can spirituality exist without God? in Spirituality ·
blue bird says:...Nagarjuna essentially demonstrates that everything relies on something else just to exist. Nothing exists in a vacuum. That’s what emptiness actually means—it's all about dependent origination (pratityasamutpada).

What Nagarjuna is really getting at is this:

placidharbor7 says:
The way we humans typically "perceive" things and events is
built entirely on comparisons and dualities. Once you strip away those distinctions—whether one vanishes, the other does, or they both disappear—all you're left with is an empty void in the middle of nowhere.


Everything else you mentioned (and I don't just mean in your specific example) is honestly just extra noise.
Can spirituality exist without God? in Spirituality ·
Edward Flores4 said:It’s actually quite the opposite of how we define existence!

So, I have to ask—what exactly is our reliable yardstick for measuring "existence" versus "non-existence"?
Can spirituality exist without God? in Spirituality ·
Joseph Ramos11 said:That’s a fair question!🙂 If I get hit in the head during a dream and feel pain, that pain feels just as real to me as if it happened in my actual life. It's real because you don't really have a better way to distinguish what's real from what isn't, right?...

In other words, the ego is real—as long as you're identifying with it, it's nothing but pure reality to you.

And one for you too: who exactly is supposed to stop "identifying" themselves?
Can spirituality exist without God? in Spirituality ·
Edward Flores4 said:How am I supposed to get rid of something that isn't even real? Honestly, any "technique" designed to dismantle the ego is just mental gymnastics—it actually ends up reinforcing the whole illusion that the ego exists in the first place. It’s like trying to treat a disease when you aren't actually sick; if you go down that road, you're looking at a lifetime of treatment and guaranteed failure. It's the exact same story with the ego... it's pure schizophrenia. 😁

Wait, what do you mean it "doesn't exist"?
driftingwolf45 said:Master, I checked out your school. I saw your reply where you said I should come by so you could bend me over enface. Gay? Who would've thought?

Instead of an answer—well, don't be lazy. Just watch and listen to another one of Osho's enlightened souls. If you've ever met Osho in person, maybe you'll feel how
the old master lives on through this enlightened student.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jitFcyjl7Fw

The master gay kicked Richard Walker79 out of the school, so he’s refusing to respond under his name. If you want an answer, check the school. Enface.