Philosophical Speculations

Hi Cleric I don't get this at all. In the first state I mentioned in my last post, Self-Remembering, you're not at all getting rid of willing. Actually, and to the contrary, if you are not in a state of self-remembering / mindfulness, you are not really willing or acting . You are responding comple...

Thanks Mike. I can fully relate to the examples that you have given. So I'm actually mystified why you think it should be possible to see the movie from any or all others' eyes. If there's duality, there is one's own eyes, and if there is no duality, there are no eyes. Your very framing of this que...

I'm honestly confused by what you're saying Mike. You say you reach this state where you realise that there's no eyes, only the seeing, so there's no "you" who has the eyes, and no "others" who see through different eyes. But the feeling of unity aside, you realise that the expe...

Please note this well. It's very simple, it's only attachedness to ideas which prevents us to see it. It's very well that we can step out of the input slots and be aware of the wider consciousness which is no longer restricted in any one of them. But does the reader notice how surreptitiously we ha...

Hi Cleric If "...the Earthly state is indeed an octave within a higher world...", then there are multiple states and multiple worlds. And a separate experiencer of these. If you wish to call the whole shebang One World, that's okay by me, but once again it's dualism. I'm not sure where yo...

PS: I know that there are some who don't hold such a strong view about the mystical state and don't claim that it reaches the Heart of the Cosmos, thus for them it's natural that no details about the world creation are perceived in the mystical state. But this only makes matters worse because it si...

Mike, I am really confused at this point. You are explicitly stating there is duality and we live in duality , and then claiming you are still within monism and I am descending into dualism. I really don't know how to make it more explicit for you than you are making it in what you are writing. The...

Hi Ashvin No, there is duality. If there was no duality, you and I could not be having this conversation. It's true, from the "point of view" of One World, there is no duality. But then, from the "point of view" of One World, there is also no Ashvin and Mike either, or even spac...

Hi Ashvin Thanks for the response. However, when you write the bold, I think you have implicitly slipped in a dualism which divides thinking from perception. You ascribed the duality-status to the thought-forms instead of to your own mode of perceiving them. I don't understand what you are saying. ...

Hi Ashvin Thanks for the response. However, when you write the bold, I think you have implicitly slipped in a dualism which divides thinking from perception. You ascribed the duality-status to the thought-forms instead of to your own mode of perceiving them. I don't understand what you are saying. I...