Is 'this place' All Of Reality?

[Phil]

On 4/1/2023 at 5:05 PM, ConsciousDreamer666 said:

Maybe it is, maybe 'this place' and 'moment' called 'my experience' its actually the whole of reality. Everything! There is nothing 'outside' of this. Because that 'outside' its a thought.

 

No Thing. Not a thing. Whatever might be thought or believed to be the nothing ‘outside’ of ‘this’ - there isn’t. There is no ‘that’ whatever ‘that’ is thought or believed to be, including ‘nothing’ (a thought about nothing). There is absolutely not something or some thing or no thing, nothing, nothingness, etc, etc, etc - other than awareness (pointing word), outside of the spheres. By appearing as the spheres I make seem to myself I’m inside of what is actually inside (term used loosely to point)of me. 

 

Make sense?

23 hours ago, ConsciousDreamer666 said:

Just like in the vibrational scale there the lower ends feels very bad because its very far away from the highest vibrations, and the higher end gets sweeter and sweeter as it gets closer to the highest. Well, yesterday was pretty sweet if you ask me 😄

As I appear as the spheres the true as in unchanging eternal unconditional nature of me is veiled, or overlooked. 

“Then” it seems like there are thoughts, and therein - things. Separate, things. 

But there isn’t. 

“It’s”… Me. 

 

Therein to ‘point’, the key is always letting every thought about - go.

Only thoughts, concerns, doctrines, theories etc about - veil. 

I am veiled by the very activity of, Me. 

Inevitably cessation, or if you will, samadhi, that which those terms point to, that which is not a thought, belief, imagined, etc, that which is not defined by the thoughts cessation or samadhi etc - is. 

And is… already… Me. 

 

There is nothing outside of the spheres. But nothing is not, something. Nothing as in, not something, not anything, not nothing, not nothingness, not no thing. 

Is it noticed how “deep” into thoughts this already is?

Thoughts; inside, outside, me, nothing, something, etc, etc, etc. 

 

Perhaps the “benefit”, the relevance is… “consciousness work”, “personal development”, “Awakening”, “God-Consciousness”, etc, etc, etc… are all just the / those thoughts. It’s a hamster wheel of thoughts loops / there is already no ‘separate self’ getting anywhere etc. I/Me am already what’s appearing, am already (so to speak) This. (So to speak) Perception. The Spheres. 

 

Referring back to the comment about the emotional scale, (vibrational scale 👍🏻)… I am never arrived at. Never thunk. Never reached. Never obtained. Never found. Never achieved. Never attained.

 

Maybe most relevant… 

As thoughts about are let go… since Me (same Me when “you” say Me) (not “Phil)…is already what’s appearing, since Me is the greatest possible “feeling” (Unconditional) which already is what’s appearing as “thoughts” & “perception” (The Spheres)…. There is simply no longer the activity of thought or beliefs to the contrary obscuring. Put another way now, more simply, Unconditional Love is the (seemingly) result of letting thoughts go / recognizing whatever ‘it’ is, it is, just the thought. What’s ‘let go’ (thoughts) is appearance. So there isn’t a separate self letting separate things go, or ‘getting somewhere’ such as with ‘consciousness work’ etc. There’s letting thoughts go and “seeing” that there aren’t ‘things’. Just the thought(s) that there is. Apparently. 

 

Make sense?

 

 

[ConsciousDreamer666]

2 hours ago, Phil said:

There is simply no longer the activity of thought or beliefs to the contrary obscuring. Put another way now, more simply, Unconditional Love is the (seemingly) result of letting thoughts go / recognizing whatever ‘it’ is, it is, just the thought.

 

Ok I think that 'clicked' something hahaha 

 

God-Awakened or Not, 'my' perception feels way Lighter today 🤔 (Like it has 'holes' through it.... kind of like a gruyere cheese I guess 🤣 )

Edited April 3, 2023 by ConsciousDreamer666

[Phil]

@ConsciousDreamer666

🙂🙏🏼

[ConsciousDreamer666]

"How can I get this Love I experienced again" ---< A thought - condition.

The actuality is: Love is already 'Here'. I already am experiencing it/Being It. 🤭

 

"But I need to reach a high state of consciousness to experience Love" ---< Another condition, that blocks what is already the Truth = Love.

 

Remove all conditions/Thoughts = Love unfolds.   😍😍😍 

 

Additionally: "What if I forget it? I need to remember this for ever"----< There is no future to remember this. Is already here, always. It is the Truth. 

 

 

Edited April 3, 2023 by ConsciousDreamer666

[James123]

On 4/1/2023 at 11:17 PM, ConsciousDreamer666 said:

Also... if 'This Place' its all that Exists.... (This place: Awareness.)

What is existence or awareness?

[ConsciousDreamer666]

2 minutes ago, James123 said:

What is existence or awareness?

nothing, a story of the ego 😬 ahahaha That post is old...

[James123]

Just now, ConsciousDreamer666 said:

nothing, a story of the ego 😬 ahahaha That post is old...

What is post or old?

[ConsciousDreamer666]

8 minutes ago, James123 said:

What is post or old?

hahaha stop it , I know... thoughts.

 

Love is here. It never left.  Thanks for reminding me again 😄

[James123]

15 hours ago, ConsciousDreamer666 said:

hahaha stop it , I know... thoughts.

 

Love is here. It never left.  Thanks for reminding me again 😄

😂😂😂

[Someone here]

@Phil If direct experience is all there is or at least all that is certain.. Then that means that "this place" is really all of reality.. Hence, solipsism? 

[Phil]

22 minutes ago, Someone here said:

@Phil If direct experience is all there is or at least all that is certain.. Then that means that "this place" is really all of reality.. Hence, solipsism? 

Direct experience points, but isn’t certain. In direct experience certain is the thought certain. Solipsism is an ism, and is the activity of thought, same as certain. A theory or doctrine, a belief (if believed). Put another way, the illusion of ‘knowing’ & that knowing is illusory, is overlooked. 

[Someone here]

12 minutes ago, Phil said:

Direct experience points, but isn’t certain. In direct experience certain is the thought certain. Solipsism is an ism, and is the activity of thought, same as certain. A theory or doctrine, a belief (if believed). Put another way, the illusion of ‘knowing’ & that knowing is illusory, is overlooked. 

So we can't say anything about direct experience because it will be conceptualized? (as you say 'perception can't be thunk)…? 

Let me know.. Do you agree with the statement "to exist is to experience"…? 

For example.. Rocks exist, but we have absolutely no evidence that they experience anything. So does a rock know that it is a rock? 

I'm assuming that " direct experience" means conscious experience. If it just means "stuff happens to the target of the experience" then, sure, stuff happens to rocks. If we go with that definition, then I'd change my opinion to yes. If something exists.. if it's a form of matter, located in the Universe.. then stuff happens to it, but the real dilemma.. The real pain in the ass is how do you verfiy that "other people" have consciousness and not just like rocks?

5 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

What's the difference between truth and reality?

A=A. B=B. 

Truth is what's true. 

Reality is what's real

[Phil]

1 hour ago, Someone here said:

So we can't say anything about direct experience because it will be conceptualized? (as you say 'perception can't be thunk)…? 

Anything can be said about direct experience, and direct experience can always be inspected to see if what’s said is true as in accurate of & indicative of direct experience. 

1 hour ago, Someone here said:

Let me know.. Do you agree with the statement "to exist is to experience"…? 

The beauty of direct experience is that it’s not really about agreeing or disagreeing, but rather what’s true, or, actual. 

1 hour ago, Someone here said:

For example.. Rocks exist, but we have absolutely no evidence that they experience anything. So does a rock know that it is a rock? 

The thought ‘rock’ appears, and identifying as an experiencer and or as a knower, the belief(s) can be projected onto perception via believing the thought ‘rock’ is perception and does or doesn’t know and or experience.

 

There is no evidence that there is knowing, experience or existence.  Direct experience isn’t synonymous with evidence or proof.  In direct experience evidence and proof are the thoughts evidence and proof.

1 hour ago, Someone here said:

I'm assuming that " direct experience" means conscious experience.

Also the beauty of inspection of direct experience… all assumptions can be inspected. Direct experience can be inspected as to ‘conscious’ being a duality, such as conscious experience & unconscious and or subconscious experience. 

1 hour ago, Someone here said:

If it just means "stuff happens to the target of the experience" then, sure, stuff happens to rocks. If we go with that definition, then I'd change my opinion to yes. If something exists.. if it's a form of matter, located in the Universe.. then stuff happens to it, but the real dilemma.. The real pain in the ass is

 

how do you verfiy that "other people" have consciousness and not just like rocks?

A=A. B=B. 

Truth is what's true. 

Reality is what's real

By inspecting assumptions. For ‘stuff happens to rocks’ to be believed, the a priori assumption is ‘stuff happens to me’. ‘Other people have consciousness’ is a belief based on ‘I’m a person, which has consciousness’. 

 

If one is identifying as a unicorn, no-unicorn isn’t an event which is going to happen & result in one no longer being a unicorn. There already isn’t / aren’t unicorns or anyone who knows there isn’t. 

[Someone here]

47 minutes ago, Phil said:

Anything can be said about direct experience, and direct experience can always be inspected to see if what’s said is true as in accurate of & indicative of direct experience. 

The beauty of direct experience is that it’s not really about agreeing or disagreeing, but rather what’s true, or, actual. 

The thought ‘rock’ appears, and identifying as an experiencer and or as a knower, the belief(s) can be projected onto perception via believing the thought ‘rock’ is perception and does or doesn’t know and or experience.

 

There is no evidence that there is knowing, experience or existence.  Direct experience isn’t synonymous with evidence or proof.  In direct experience evidence and proof are the thoughts evidence and proof.

Also the beauty of inspection of direct experience… all assumptions can be inspected. Direct experience can be inspected as to ‘conscious’ being a duality, such as conscious experience & unconscious and or subconscious experience. 

By inspecting assumptions. For ‘stuff happens to rocks’ to be believed, the a priori assumption is ‘stuff happens to me’. ‘Other people have consciousness’ is a belief based on ‘I’m a person, which has consciousness’. 

 

If one is identifying as a unicorn, no-unicorn isn’t an event which is going to happen & result in one no longer being a unicorn. There already isn’t / aren’t unicorns or anyone who knows there isn’t. 

I knew you were going to say that haha .  Sure you can say that what's an accurate description of direct experience is that consciousness have the thought "me". But the assumption that seems more convenient for me is that I am a human being that has consciousness. And that consciousness is a byproduct of brain.
.also I use the word experience for life forms to have, and not for inert materials to have, while both do exist. I'd be more likely to say that to be sentient is to experience.
I'm not sure if you are familiar with ontological nihilism. Because you keep denying the existence of stuff that is otherwise obvious to exist. Like people, rocks, brains etc
You know at least that "something" is happening right now, right?
That there is already anything suggests that there will always be anything. Not that everything that now exists will someday no longer exist, but that existence itself will never end.
So I'm just going to say the issue is still unresolved.

[Phil]

34 minutes ago, Someone here said:

I knew you were going to say that haha .  Sure you can say that what's an accurate description of direct experience is that consciousness have the thought "me".

This might sound wild at first… but what you knew I was going to say, and what you’re saying I said ⬆️ … aren’t actually the direct experience, as in, aren’t actually what was said. This is verifiable by looking at what was said. 

 

34 minutes ago, Someone here said:

But the assumption that seems more convenient for me is that I am a human being that has consciousness. And that consciousness is a byproduct of brain.
.also I use the word experience for life forms to have, and not for inert materials to have, while both do exist. I'd be more likely to say that to be sentient is to experience.

Assumptions can be inspected. 

 

34 minutes ago, Someone here said:

I'm not sure if you are familiar with ontological nihilism. Because you keep denying the existence of stuff that is otherwise obvious to exist. Like people, rocks, brains etc

That’s kinda the thingy with assumptions, and continuing to assume for convenience or any other reason in comparison with inspecting direct experience.  This is again the beauty of inspecting direct experience. Inspection isn’t pointless circular philosophical rumination based on personal assumptions. 

 

34 minutes ago, Someone here said:

You know at least that "something" is happening right now, right?

No. 

 

34 minutes ago, Someone here said:

That there is already anything suggests that there will always be anything. Not that everything that now exists will someday no longer exist, but that existence itself will never end.
So I'm just going to say the issue is still unresolved.

Assumptions tend to follow assumptions to (seemingly) make sense of the a priori assumptions. Inspection of direct experience on the other hand actually does make sense, as in the difference is felt. 

[Someone here]

@Phil okay thanks for your help and sorry for misrepresenting what you said. 🙏

 I'm just really struggling with this solipsism bullcrap since listening to Leo's video on the subject (which is still available on YouTube). 

Anyways have a nice day /evening. 

[Phil]

4 minutes ago, Someone here said:

@Phil okay thanks for your help and sorry for misrepresenting what you said. 🙏

 I'm just really struggling with this solipsism bullcrap since listening to Leo's video on the subject (which is still available on YouTube). 

Anyways have a nice day /evening. 

No worries at all brother. Nothing to apologize for. Have a great one as well! 🍻 

[Phil]

@Someone here

Ever considered that maybe the struggle isn’t with solipsism at all, but really, with (believing in) knowing & understanding?

Not in the manor that there is knowing & understanding, and you don’t have enough or don’t know or understand something I or someone else does about infinite consciousness… but that inherent in infinite there isn’t also these (finite) things… ‘knowing’ & ‘understanding’, but apparently you’re convincingly being told there is… for hours… every week… overlooking the very first word wasn’t true? Maybe it’s not solipsism ‘in your craw’ at all, just deception, misinformation & manipulation, doubt & fear (guidance, in regard to what’s being said). One could maybe contemplate why one would be asked to leave for sharing that whatever it is, it is ‘just a thought’, and the actuality is unthinkable love. (Thoughts, narrative… about ‘separate selves’ might arise now, about what’s being said. Narrative which was employed in the very asking of no one to leave. See?)

 

Who would have any knowledge about an infinite being, while infinite being is appearing as ‘a who’.

That ‘knowledge’ would be delusion, beliefs, blasphemous. 

How could an appearing finite mind, seek & find an infinite being (awareness / infinite consciousness), which is already  appearing as, the apparent finite mind? (More so, the thought, ‘finite mind’). 

Or, seeking and the seeker are the activity of thoughts. 

Thoughts are appearing. 

Or, infinite seems to become ‘form’, ‘finite’, ‘separate selves’, by appearing, and therein never becomes any ‘thing’, and in regard to the apparent ‘separate selves’ infinite is appearing as… the entirety of the ‘separate self’ is infinite being appearing. Thus any thing, any thought, believed about, infinite consciousness…. Is already an appearance of infinite consciousness. 

 

It’s not an adding, a putting on of rose tinted glasses (deceptive beliefs, knowledge about infinite consciousness, understanding, etc, etc)

It’s an unknowing, unbelieving, a taking off of the rose tinted glasses (rhetorical duality of knowing & understanding and infinite consciousness). 

 

“I’m unworthy”, “I’m undeserving”, “I’m not enough”, “I wasn’t / I’m not loved”, etc… these thoughts are never resolved, just let go. The self the thoughts are about is just the thoughts about… which are appearance of infinite consciousness / unconditional love… and not actually a (separate, finite, form, thing) self. There is no self which becomes, attains, obtains, integrates, embodies, etc, etc, etc…

….that which is already infinite consciousness, infinite self… is appearing as, and apparently believing, those thoughts. 

 

Meditation is simply the allowing of the beliefs, the activity of thought, to settle; disappear. 

Yoga is simply allowing the emotional discord of misinterpretations, conditioning, to release. 

An end of misidentification, misunderstanding, conjecture, deception and the suffering felt therein, which never truly happened in the first place. 

Imagine these being degraded & discredited, in favor of a ‘my understanding’.

 

Put yet another way… notice knowing & understanding are the thoughts ‘knowing’ & ‘understanding’… by attempting to point to knowing & understanding in perception. This clarifies knowing & understanding are thoughts. 

 

[ConsciousDreamer666]

3 hours ago, Phil said:

@Someone here

Ever considered that maybe the struggle isn’t with solipsism at all, but really, with (believing in) knowing & understanding?

 

 

👏🎯

[Joseph Maynor]

This is what I think leads to solipsism.