Posts by mistybison

Kenneth Peterson5 said:So if "everything is outside," including our supposed "inner life," does that mean one thing swallows the other up? Like, does "everything external" encompass "everything internal" because, at the end of the day, everything we feel inside is just what builds the world outside?

You brought up this whole illusion of "free will"—this thing we're supposedly "given" so we can play the game of choosing between opposites, you know? Like "yes vs. no" or "left vs. right."
That’s why I was wondering: do we actually need to experience those contradictions just to realize what's already been set in stone?

I couldn't say for sure, as I was simply describing how things appear to me. It isn't meant to be an absolute truth you have to accept.

Kenneth Peterson5 said:But what even are these "internal dramas" anyway?

So, do we need to feel that conflict just to realize what's actually real?

In what sense?

rustymaker5 said:I tend to think that free will isn't just some grand illusion, provided we stop looking at life as if we're just uncovering pre-written scripts and start seeing it as an active process of creation...

I honestly don't follow this logic at all... 🤷

If we view existence as "the self within the world," where there is a clear divide between "me" and "everything else," then we naturally question whether free will exists. After much thought and searching for evidence, people arrive at various conclusions. From that specific perspective, the concept of free will is a valid subject for discussion. However, if we look through the lens of unity—where the self and the world are one—then questions regarding free will or freedom become unnecessary, as does any further speculation on the matter.

steeleagle13 said:Man, look at how you view God:

God is a product of the mind
or
God is the mind

Are you asking if God is an idea created by our minds, or if our mind is actually God/the creator?

Kenneth Peterson5 said:Look, whether it's logical or not—I don't know, man—but I definitely don't get it.
If I don't actually have free will, then I can't choose anything because everything's already been decided for me... but then how come I keep choosing to "reject" exactly what I'm supposedly stuck with?

That is precisely how the dynamics of existence unfold. 🙂 We wouldn't perceive anything as an event, a progression, or a change if there weren't opposing forces within ourselves and our environment creating that sensation. While you struggle between "I want" and "I don't want," that very dilemma is "given" to maintain the illusion of free will. This sense of choice—as we experience it—is essential for the "self" to exist as something distinct from the rest of the world. It creates the necessary mirror effect for reality to function.

hiddenpuma75 said:"Quote:"

mistybison As specified by hiddenpuma75: The human mind possesses self-awareness; it isn't the other way around.

That’s something we just don't know yet.
We don't have a single shred of evidence to suggest that's actually the case.
The only thing we can say for certain—the one piece of undeniable proof we actually possess—is that we are conscious.
I honestly can't say for sure whether it's "what" or "who" serves as the true source of our consciousness. It's one of those big, unanswered questions that keeps me up at night.
I can't say that I know, personally.

"Quote:"

So, are we really saying we have the free will to decide whether to set out on the path, actually walk it, and ultimately reach our destination? 😉

Taj So, basically... Everything you added after that was really just your own take on my original point.
Don't try to put words in my mouth.
I feel like I'm being clear enough, though I suppose I tend to rely a bit too heavily on asking questions and using complex sentence structures. So, basically... It’s coming from you.
This is the core of the matter, and I'm putting my own words behind it— It seems to me... .
I wasn't the one jumping to any deep conclusions here—that was all you.

Honestly, I couldn't care less about the semantics of it all—the "meaning" of a word, the concept of free will, or any of that philosophical jargon. It just doesn't interest me.
The only thing I’m absolutely certain of—the one thing that’s truly undeniable—is that I am aware.
That’s just not your thing, is it? You’d much rather focus on everything else—diving deep into the contents of consciousness and firing off a thousand questions instead.
And even "a few" actually means quite a bit...
That’s really the deciding factor right there, isn't it? Once you hit that point, everyone tends to head off in their own direction.

"Quote:"

What if we had never even heard of these "spiritual teachers"? What if we were just living our lives in some remote village deep in the Amazon rainforest, with absolutely nobody ever pointing us toward a "path" or showing us the way? Is it actually possible that the right to spiritual growth is reserved only for educated, literate Americans who have the capacity to read accounts of someone else's enlightenment? It makes me wonder if we’re suggesting that salvation is similarly restricted to those who have specifically heard the teachings of Jesus. 😢

Look, why are we circling back to this? I feel like I already gave you an answer to that up above—whether we’ve heard it before or not doesn't really change the point.

To be honest, I don't really have a clue what spiritual development is actually supposed to be, nor do I care much about the whole "path" to it. It’s just not something that interests me.
To be honest, I have no idea what salvation even is. And frankly? It’s not something I’m particularly interested in.

There’s only one thing I truly care about, and honestly, it's the only thing that actually matters: what is the one single truth that exists?
(It seems like you might have sent an incomplete message or perhaps just a quick "me" to get my attention! I'm here and ready whenever you want to dive into a topic. What's on your mind? That’s certainly how it looks! :)
And that right there? That is what consciousness actually is. 🙂

"I choose to leave everything else behind as unnecessary baggage... and, frankly, unproven."

But what if you only feel as though you are aware? 😉

Awareness exists solely through the interplay of opposites: consciousness versus unconsciousness, being versus non-being, having versus lacking. If you eliminate one side of this duality, the other loses its definition and collapses. "Existence" is essentially a game of double mirrors. Lose one side, and you lose everything. 🙂 Questions and answers can only exist within this "mirror world"—mere reflections constantly mirroring one another, simultaneously real and unreal. Concepts like "consciousness," "the mind," or "the self" also belong to this mirror world.

I have moved several posts from the old Parsifal thread (which was merged with the 'Academy') into these new topics:
Rejecting philosophy isn't an intellectual act; it's the first step toward true freedom.
Neither science, religion, nor philosophy can provide an answer to the mystery of CONSCIOUSNESS. How can that be?
The chat logs and private discussions remain over at the Academy. Please send me a DM if you believe any other posts should be moved. 🙂 If you would like me to, Parsifal, I can merge these two threads into one, though I believe they have a better chance of growing separately.

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! 🙂

Knowledge cannot exist in any form other than the mental. Every experience we have is ultimately a mental experience. 🙂 Everything you think, feel, or perceive—regardless of whether it feels like "emptiness," "silence," or "enlightenment"—is ultimately just a state of mind. Even physical sensations require the mind to recognize them in order to be experienced. For awareness to exist, there must be a mind to host that awareness; the human mind possesses self-awareness, rather than the other way around.

Not at all! Someone else's experiences should only be viewed as guideposts.
We walk our own paths. We achieve our own goals.Only if we give it a shot.

So, does this mean we truly possess the free will to decide whether to begin the journey, walk the path, and ultimately reach our destination? 😉
What if we had never even heard of these "spiritual teachers"? Imagine living in a remote village deep within the Amazon rainforest where no one ever pointed you toward a "path." Is it really possible that the right to spiritual growth is reserved only for educated, literate Americans capable of reading stories about someone else's enlightenment? It seems just as exclusive as claiming salvation is only available to those who have heard of Jesus. 😢

You overlooked those followers of the faith who believe we have all already reached enlightenment and can simply rest. It is a belief system that poses a thousand difficult questions to anyone seeking to escape the cave.
It seems to me that you practice your faith quite intensely.

You don't look so good. 😉 I don't subscribe to that particular "faith." As for enlightenment, it simply isn't something I believe in or have any interest in pursuing. 🙂 I believe in various states of consciousness. Some exist within us naturally and spontaneously, requiring only self-awareness to be recognized, while others must be attained through persistent practice.

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. 😉

It seems my previous points were misunderstood. 🙂
All "knowledge" is essentially just "faith in knowledge." It remains relative and subject to change, much like anything else in this material world. Even if one were to achieve "liberation"—assuming such a thing is possible—one could never truly say, "I know," because doing so would create an internal contradiction. 😉

Do you believe it is necessary to trust in the experiences, insights, and instructions of others just to be considered someone on a "spiritual path" toward enlightenment? If so, is there really any distinction between a believer following the teachings of Bernadette or Jesus (who also taught that the Kingdom of God is accessible to all and provided a roadmap to get there)? Does being spiritual mean having faith and working toward its fulfillment? Or does it mean simply existing within a comfortable web of ideas we've constructed for ourselves? Perhaps it is something else entirely.

hiddenpuma75 said:Even though we both speak English, let's stick to it so the rest of the world can follow along! 😍It looks like we’re just not on the same wavelength.
They say repetition is the mother of all learning, so let's give this one more go—this time from a few different angles.

Haven't I mentioned a few times now that I try to be generous and act with a bit of humanity?

"If you want in, you're in—no pressure."
"If they don't want to, they won't—and besides, the fruit will ripen on its own." Honestly, where is the sense of obligation or necessity in that?

2)

Maybe I didn't express myself very clearly before, so let me try to approach this from a different angle and take a softer, more indirect route to get my point across.

Since I’ve noticed that knowing what a grain of sand is doesn't actually make you an expert on the desert, I wanted to point out that true understanding isn't some final destination—it’s more like a theoretical philosophical position. Simply "understanding" something isn't enough to grasp the practical reality of how things actually work, like knowing exactly how a pepper grinder operates or the intricate details of someone's daily chores. 😍
Sometimes I find myself wishing I could take the wisdom shared by Buddha and express it with a bit more grace—something more vivid, more poetic, and perhaps a little wiser than my own clumsy attempts at words.

All our posts on this forum about this world are a lot like little chicks that...
"Inside the egg, it’s just a chaotic swirl of potential, preparing for the world it's about to enter."

Or to put it simply—plain and simple.

If we haven't truly reached enlightenment by now, then we’re clearly doing something wrong—and I think even Milton and Patricia would agree with me on that!

If Buddha and the guy behind the counter at a local corner store are actually one and the same—like Nisargadatta and a neighborhood shopkeeper—then all this deep philosophizing we’re doing here is just spinning our wheels. It would mean everything we discuss in this little bubble is pretty much meaningless compared to how the world actually works outside this egg.

And that’s exactly why I say—

Who wants to sit around playing philosopher and saying, "Well, I've finally made it, there's nothing left to chase," only to wonder if there’s actually anything more out there? Honestly, let them have their moment.
Honestly, if someone doesn't bite when that bait is dangled in front of them... well, they're just missing out.
It’s pretty obvious there are two schools of thought on this... one side argues that an acorn is essentially just an oak tree in waiting, while the other insists that the actual journey from a tiny nut to a towering oak is far too long and impractical to be considered a direct connection.

I just keep coming back to this point: you can't just call any piece of wood "acorn." There are definitely some shady sellers out there trying to convince people that it doesn't matter, acting like we’re all just one big happy family of wood types!

With all due respect—that’s just pure, unadulterated pig politics. 😛

----
I’ve started to notice a troubling pattern on this forum lately: there are a ton of counterfeit $10,000 bills being circulated under the guise of legitimate currency.

I’m only here to talk to people who have actually been in the business of forgery—or are currently working it.
(forgive me for the falsification) 😁 It’s all about having a sense for agriculture—specifically when it comes to growing oak trees. You need that intuition to tell the difference between genuine substance and someone just spinning empty tales. There's a massive gap between actual results and those people who constantly brag, "I did this, and nobody else understands my genius." I'm talking about distinguishing true realization—like knowing exactly how peppercorns are ground, understanding the craft behind spinning black wool, or seeing how an acorn actually transforms into a mighty oak—from mere hot air. 🙂

Who's in? If you're interested, just say the word.
It’s pretty simple: if someone doesn't want to, they just won't.

i

There’s no blame to be found, but there’s certainly no praise to be given either.

To each their own, I suppose.
It’s a vast, open expanse.

Cheers!

The contradiction lies in starting with the premise that a person chooses to 'want' or 'not want,' while simultaneously claiming free will doesn't exist. If there is no free will, choice is an illusion and one simply exists as they are in any given moment. However, if we can work toward becoming an 'oak' instead of just an 'acorn'—then free will certainly exists.

If we aren't TRULY enlightened here (and it's obvious to both Milton and Priscilla that we aren't

while Buddha and the clerk at the local corner store—Nisargadatta and Aunt Bernadette—are), then all this philosophizing is just spinning our wheels compared to how the world actually functions outside this little bubble of a forum.

But what if it isn't?
What would become of our (non)enlightenment if we had never heard the stories of that clerk or his aunt?
You see that, in the end, everything comes down to FAITH. 🙂 (And just like that, we are back to the beginning of the topic. 😛 ) Many people embark on a 'spiritual path' because they believe someone else has walked it before and reached the destination. But consider these possibilities:
1) No one has actually achieved 'liberation,' but rather just one of many possible mental or physical experiences attainable through training and effort—experiences that are never final, as one experience always leads to another.
2) People have achieved 'liberation,' but not through their own striving; instead, it simply 'happened' to them, like a glitch in the matrix of their holographic program 😍 which they then interpreted as 'enlightenment' and began teaching others about.
?
There are endless possibilities, all of which should be considered; we can test them all, but clinging to them creates limitations. 🙂 It is much the same with all these theories of consciousness. They are all fascinating, but if we discard them all—what remains? Any entanglement in ideas is similar, whether they are scientific, religious, spiritual, or philosophical 'truths.'

It is clear there are two schools of thought... one saying the acorn is essentially the oak, and another that rejects that idea.

I believe there are far more than just those two schools. 🙂 There is also the school that rejected the entire debate regarding acorns and oaks altogether. 😉

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.

I intend to eventually take the time😛 to pull out the high-quality posts and split them into two separate threads—one on the meaninglessness of philosophy and one on consciousness (which was my original plan anyway). 🙂Right now, we are in the middle of a site reorganization, so I will handle it once that is complete.

hiddenpuma75 said:These two questions hit home for me, and I really want to share my perspective with myself and everyone else here, because to me, the logic seems perfectly clear.🙂

1) The one thing you absolutely cannot doubt is your own awareness. It is the single most certain thing we possess. It’s the ONLY spiritual truth in the entire world that no one can question. To doubt your own consciousness is, in itself, a process occurring *within* consciousness, which only serves to confirm that awareness exists.🙂

2) The reality is, we don't actually have free will. It honestly surprises me that people cling to the idea of having it when it's so easy to verify for yourself. We aren't debating abstract things like whether angels shave or if the universe has four or ten dimensions.
Since I was once (just like everyone else) under the illusion that I possessed free will,
I can now look back on it.
Here is how it became crystal clear to me that everything just happens on its own.

Notice how you don't say, "I am beating my own heart."!
Instead, you say, "The heart beats. Blood flows."

So why, then, incorrectly do we say, "I am thinking my thoughts"?
When it is blatantly obvious that both thoughts and the heartbeat simply occur by themselves.🙂

--

Consider one more mistake that almost everyone falls into.

99.9999% of people will say, "I had a dream last night."
That is technically wrong, because we didn't dream those things through our own free will; rather, we were the object being dreamed.

Therefore, it would be more accurate to say that we ARE DREAMED. 😉

So, what we should really be saying is:

A dream is happening...

Last night, I was dreamed.🙂
Or,
last night, dreaming happened through me.

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.😉

hiddenpuma75 said:I’d like to request that the moderator close this thread. It feels like we've entered an unmonitored free-for-all where everyone is just circling the same old drain—talking about God, the universe, free will, consciousness... honestly, it’s just endless repetitive chatter.

"I believe it’s high time this topic was merged into the 'School' section." 🙂
I’m actually leaning on a previous precedent here—specifically, some wise observations and calls made by a moderator in the past.

Looking back at the historical records of this forum:

Quote:
soadfan says: The whole point of this discussion has completely evaporated.

And the moderator noted:

"I think it’s ready to be integrated into 'Master Ivanov's School of Enlightenment'." 😍

''''''This thread has become impossible to follow and has lost all connection to the original post. One 'School' is more than enough for this subforum.
🙂 ''''''

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

Thanks! 🙂

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.😉

Jeremy Davis7 said:This thread shouldn't be left to die in the archives!
There’s way too much good stuff in these comments and some old debates here that honestly deserve a second look!
Where's the mod? Taking a nap?
Look, I get it, modesty is a virtue, but show your face once in a while—it won't kill you.

😛

In Japanese, the word for "heart" is kokoro (心 - こころ), and it encompasses much more than just an organ; it refers to the heart, mind, spirit, feelings, core, soul, and thoughts.

The kokoro, heart-mind, means the whole thing—it represents the entirety of our being. It integrates the cerebral, the emotional, and the psychological into one cohesive unit.

I found this interesting passage (for those who read English):

Conversations about Clown and zen : a language of The Heart? Kokoro!

🙂

driftingraven122 said:But even so, we're really just drawing a parallel between how these two things—the ego illusion and hallucinations—impact what we perceive as reality. It doesn't mean they are functionally identical, of course.

Then again, maybe we're using 'ego' in a different sense—like when I want to lift my left arm or grab a glass of water; I personally see that 'ego' in action and consider it necessary for any movement at all, which suggests it runs deeper—that the ego is precisely that essential process of identification.

Whether I want to lift my left hand, drink some water, identify with Buddhist philosophy, or apply some sort of 'technique,' it all feels fundamentally the same to me (in terms of 'deepening the ego illusion,' obviously). Actually, this whole idea of discarding 'spiritual techniques' sounds a bit like the ego manifesting in its most conventional sense. 😁

Which brings me to this:

The philosopher in my signature mentions recognizing "his identity with this unity," which translates to realizing one's identity as an inseparable part of a larger whole. But identity and Unity Software are actually opposites... aren't they? If you recognize your identity as the whole—identity vanishes—the transformation is complete. Because the process of identification is essentially a metamorphosis into a transcendental "object," an attractor, or to put it in McLuhan terms, a "medium"—whatever that may be—which serves as the ultimate goal of the identification process.

It all sounds a little too much like a fairy tale to me, honestly, because I can't really picture a functioning human being who isn't currently engaged in a process of identification. I mean, I don't see how identity disappears if it's recognized as part of a whole; hasn't the identity just shifted slightly? Doesn't the ego still function?

I would never have thought of myself as someone who identifies with anything; that concept would be completely foreign to me if I hadn't read about it in books. I believe it stems from an artificial internal division that looks something like this: the "self" (which people usually call "consciousness") possesses certain attributes—or contents, such as the mind and body, as Lou might put it—and then the "self" identifies with those contents. According to this view, the more one progresses in stripping away what they believe they are not, the closer they get to their true nature. However, I am not inclined toward this specific view of the "self" or this kind of internal division.

I believe the "self" is a whole composed of multiple layers and parts, yet it does not function through divisions. Specifically, we won't reach any kind of "true self" by losing "identifications"; we will merely redirect our attention to different parts of ourselves. Consciousness, mind, and body are all equal components of who we are. 🙂 We should aim to perceive this unity rather than pursuing an illusory and impossible division of the self, believing that by shifting our focus, we will somehow "lose ourselves" like peeling an onion. 😁 We are always what we truly are, regardless of the form we take. 🙂 It is only from the perspective of wholeness and unity that we can clearly see that the "self" is not just consciousness plus mind plus body. The "self" expands to include what we typically perceive as "not me"—the reality surrounding us. Nothing "outside of me" exists differently than "to me." The "self" and the "world" together constitute the "sense of being," which is what we call "I am." In extreme subjectivism, a state of emptiness arises where nothing else can be determined or defined, meaning "I am" is no longer synonymous with "existence." At that point, identifications truly cease to exist because they become impossible to create.

Just a few thoughts...

If "spirituality" is defined as self-discovery, then believing in God isn't strictly necessary. In fact, you don't even need to believe in a "soul" or any other concept we can't verify with absolute certainty. It seems to me that when embarking on this journey, one is better off traveling light—stripping away everything that might clutter the mind or lead us astray through preconceived patterns of thought. Nothing more than self-belief is required, and most of us are quite certain of our own existence. 😉

On the other hand, if "spirituality" is a search for God, then faith in God becomes the prerequisite for the journey. Typically, we look for God in the external world first before turning our gaze inward. While the process of self-discovery involves searching for the source of our being and our purpose, seeking God means looking for the entity we believe to be our ultimate origin and meaning. Have you ever noticed how reality seems to reshape itself to align with our convictions? Once we commit to a belief, we suddenly encounter endless evidence supporting it, almost as if the universe is conspiring to confirm we are right, making it incredibly easy to convince ourselves that we have found the absolute TRUTH. However, just as nothing in this world is permanent, our beliefs shift as well. Throughout my life, my understanding of "God" has evolved many times, mirroring my own internal growth.

Who are you searching for—yourself or God?

There are countless paths toward self-knowledge and infinite ways to seek God. Some follow the well-trodden trails left by those before us, while others choose to blaze their own unique path.

Are you still walking the spiritual path, or have you reached its end? Have you truly grasped the essence of yourself or God? Is such a feat even possible? Or is it more practical to simply let go? How can you be sure that what you claim to KNOW isn't merely FAITH in ideas that happen to suit your current stage of personal development? How do we distinguish between FAITH and KNOWLEDGE in a spiritual context?

Welcome. 🙂

Reading through your posts, I get the impression that most of you view the spiritual journey as being synonymous with personal religion. If we were to set aside faith entirely—even one's own private beliefs—could we still speak of spirituality? What would a spiritual path look like without faith? Is it even possible for such a path to exist?

Is believing in something greater than ourselves—a deeper purpose behind our existence—merely the initial spark that sets us on a spiritual journey, or is it a constant companion along the way? Can spirituality truly exist without God, regardless of how one defines Him? Is it possible to be spiritual without being a believer? Furthermore, if you feel you "know" something for certain, how do you distinguish actual knowledge from simply having faith in what you know?

boldsailor32 said:Am I only allowed to defend my ideas if I hold a moderator position?

Does an average user not have that right?🙏🙏🙏

Let's assume being a moderator gives you a 5% chance to make your point, while a regular member has a 0% chance. 😛 😁

Sarah James7 said:Just a few days ago, a friend of mine gave birth, and her mother immediately bought the baby a red coral bracelet to prevent colic!?!?!?!?

That is a completely different matter. 😎 😁

driftingfox33 said:I heard that exact same thing from some girls down South, and I was honestly speechless. Before I started college, I had never even heard such nonsense.
The whole situation felt bizarre—living in a dorm in Washington, D.C., during the turn of the millennium, looking at a future lawyer or executive... [dopiši: _______], yet she was absolutely convinced you aren't allowed to wash your hair or shower while on your period.😲

This matches my experience as well. I first encountered those ideas from a few girls back in college. 😁

I assume these old superstitions stem from the idea that a woman's body is more sensitive during menstruation and prone to catching a cold. Since women used to bathe only once a week as a custom, they likely avoided doing so during their period to prevent getting sick.

Lawrence Robinson5 said:Why are you so worried about the impact you have on people when you view their impact on you as something positive? Being receptive to someone else's point of view basically means being open to evolving through that influence. That part is your choice, but the thing you're afraid of—that's entirely up to them.

I am not easily swayed and I tend to be quite skeptical, so other people's ideas don't really affect me, but not everyone is built that way. There are plenty of people who adopt the thoughts and views of others without question, which can lead to some dangerous situations. I have never regretted staying silent, but I have certainly regretted speaking up more than once. I much prefer the idea that most people don't take me too seriously.😁

Lawrence Robinson5 said:a few questions for everyone here:

I’ve been thinking lately—when did we collectively decide that being human, just as we are, isn't quite enough to grasp the truth? When did we decide our own minds aren't sufficient, that our feelings don't count, or that our physical senses are basically useless? Since when did perception become something we can't trust?

Think about it: everything we actually know comes through those exact things—our subjective, raw experiences. Every single insight we possess is thanks to individual breakthroughs, which are, by their very nature, subjective.
A crowd can't really birth an idea from scratch—but man, they sure can corrupt one if they feel like it. 😁
The machines we use to measure outcomes? Those are just physical manifestations of human ideas—products of an individual's mind and hands.
And even the conclusions we draw about "objective reality"? Those are brought to us by—you guessed it—(only) the human mind.

So why all this intense skepticism toward subjective impressions? Why do we give more weight to some machine's reading than to our own eyes and ears? Is it just because it's considered an "impression"? But that impression exists—it's just as real as anything else out there.

When did every single person on this planet ever agree that something is 100% objectively, undeniably real?

And honestly, why do you need—if you even do, though I think we all feel that itch sometimes—validation that you have a right to your views? It shouldn't matter, right? Because at the end of the day, you live by your own conclusions, your own convictions, your own willpower, your own grind, and your own strength—regardless of what anyone else tells you.

Do you actually live out what you write about?

Do you truly believe that what you put down on paper changes the reality of the people reading it? Is it a yes, a no, or maybe just sometimes? And if it's the latter, under what specific circumstances does that happen?

Does what you read change *your* reality? Do you feel threatened or even a little bit shaken when you stumble upon a solid argument that totally dismantles your own stance? Do you ever find yourself feeling afraid for your own identity?

And once you've chewed on all that, answer this too:

Is there any concept of reality in history that wasn't championed by someone who struggled to find "solid proof"? And is there a single one that hasn't been torn down, or at least challenged by a counter-argument, up to this point?

What's even the point of chasing the objective, when the only thing we ever truly achieve at the end of the search is a subjective internal shift? Or maybe... maybe that's exactly the whole point. 😉

I'm genuinely curious to hear what you guys think...

I can't speak for anyone else, but my own perspective changed recently. Since then, I see the world and reality through an entirely different lens. 🙂 Rather than letting this realization weigh me down or make me feel stuck, it has actually made me feel more vibrant and energetic. I now find myself free to wander and truly enjoy whatever happens to come my way. 🙂 I spent quite a while searching for something others insisted was real, though I couldn't tell if they were actually onto something. By that, I mean seeking that "ultimate realization"—the definitive answers to who we are, where we originated, and where we are headed. As for any other insights, they are naturally subjective, fleeting, and relative, existing only for a brief moment before they pass. 🙂

Why is there such widespread skepticism toward subjective impressions? It seems strange that we often grant more weight to a machine's perception than to our own.

I have previously commented on the topic of solipsism, but I believe subjectivity eventually negates itself. From a purely subjectivist standpoint, it becomes impossible to establish or assert anything with certainty. This is why we require an alternative perspective—one where we perceive ourselves and reality as distinct, independent entities. Only through this lens can we truly experience something and, consequently, categorize it as "knowledge." This view also acknowledges that there are many other beings and objects in existence beyond ourselves; by comparing our impressions of this reality, we strive to describe it more accurately. In fact, machines are often far better at perceiving and defining these impressions with greater objectivity than we are.

When did that occur? Everyone. Do people actually reach a consensus that something is 100% objectively true?

Has it always been this way? 😕 Since birth, some have naturally gravitated toward one another, operating under the assumption that if they exist as conscious beings, there must be similar beings living alongside them.

Why do we feel the need for external validation? I suspect we all go through this phase from time to time. Ultimately, it shouldn't matter, because we live by our own conclusions, our own convictions, and our own hard work. At the end of the day, you rely on your own strength, regardless of what anyone else tells you.

I am not entirely sure what this question is targeting. If we are discussing physical health, I need to consult a doctor to receive a professional diagnosis; I am not a medical professional, so I cannot treat myself—I simply know when I feel unwell. In those cases, I require external expertise to help me. If we are referring to personal philosophies and outlooks on life, there are times when I seek validation because I feel uncertain, and having someone offer support or a counterargument is helpful. However, if this refers to the viewpoints I share here, I do not post them merely to seek agreement, but because I find genuine pleasure in doing so. 🙂Regarding the influence of others, I don't exist in a vacuum. I am a product of everyone who has shaped me—my parents, friends, teachers, professors, books, movies, TV shows, and every person I have ever had a relationship with. Even now, you all play a part in shaping who I am. 🙂

do you actually live out what you write?

What I write is simply a snapshot of who I am at that exact moment. 🙂 Sometimes my views remain steady, and other times they shift by the very next day. When I look back at posts from three or four years ago, I find them funny, strange, silly, interesting, foreign, or uniquely mine. Occasionally, I find myself agreeing with my past self, while other times we are in total disagreement.

do you believe that what you write changes the reality of those who read it? yes, no, or sometimes? and if it's the latter, under what conditions?

I don't give it much thought. Honestly, I would prefer if it didn't change anything. I worry about exerting too much influence over people and the heavy responsibility that entails.

does what you read change your reality?

Sometimes.

do you feel threatened or intimidated when you encounter a strong argument that contradicts your own view?

Quite the opposite. 🙂 I find it exhilarating because it allows me to see reality from an entirely new perspective that I hadn't even considered before. It is just like reading a great book or having a conversation with an interesting person—anything that serves as inspiration.

do you ever fear for your own identity?

How could a change in my thoughts or beliefs ever truly threaten me personally? It is still me, just slightly different. Whether the change comes from you or something else doesn't matter. Change is inevitable. 🙂

is there any idea about reality that individuals advocating it throughout history haven't eventually failed to find "solid proof" for? And is there any single idea that hasn't been overturned, or at least challenged by an opposing view, up to this point?

I don't know.

What is the actual point of seeking objectivity, if all we ever truly achieve is a subjective internal shift? Or perhaps, isn't that precisely the goal?

It really depends on your perspective. If we hadn't pursued objective truths, we wouldn't have modern technology, medical breakthroughs, or any part of the world we recognize today. On the other hand, looking at discussions like this one, the aim might simply be our own personal growth. Or maybe not. Perhaps we’re just having a great time playing around with big ideas. 🙂

...let's make sure we don't turn this subforum into a space dedicated solely to "mental spirituality." 😁 😉

Ryan Wilson2 said:We are talking about actual practice here, not some form of mental masturbation where you just pour emptiness into a void.

Children, why don't you go run off and celebrate those little "enlightened" mental abilities of yours with John. Once you actually stumble upon something real, then—and only then—can you come back here.

Here we go. 😬

I've recently started practicing tarot, which is helping me better understand the very strong premonitions I've been having lately. 🙂