bsit

At best you can have a convincing illusion of control. But life is always entirely beyond your control. Ideally you learn to flow with it, including how it flows through you.

These are more accessible modern works that point you to more classical works if you’re interested:

Tantra Illuminated by Christopher Wallis

Roots of Yoga by Jim Mallinson

Three Pillars of Zen by Philip Kapleau

The World of Tibetan Buddhism by the Dalai Lama

People like to recommend the Heart Sutra and Pali Suttas, and Bhagavad Gita but I’d say it’s better to get some intro first so you can at least become aware of any prior assumptions you have about the world and realize those works come from a wildly different experience of being.

Bonus: Dark Emu by Bruce Pascoe The Hermetic Tradition in African Philosophy by Theophilus Okere Spell of the Sensuous by David Abram

Welcome! Hope you enjoy.

If you steer close to questions about metaphysics and spirituality, I highly recommend stepping outside the western paradigm. A lot of our philosophy is saturated with Christianity-influenced background assumptions, way, way more than people realize. Reaching all the way to modern psychology. It was very fascinating to recognize (and discard) them in my own thinking - and I was a basic intellectual atheist with what I incredibly naively thought was 0 Christian influence in the way I viewed the world.

Ah, I see. Unfortunately online one has come to expect people saying things like this seriously, especially when people discuss anti-authoritan ideas.

I read some Plato and philosophical works but my focus has been more on Indian and Buddhist philosophy.

Unless you are an avid reader, I don’t think it’s a good idea to try to read everything as listed. Figure out what your genuine questions about life are and read the works that attempt to provide answers. That’s why having HTRB on the background is highly useful. Don’t read just to say you did, seek to gain understanding, which is easier when you can make the books relevant to your life.

There’s something deeply ironic about saying people should be forced to read Orwell…

How to Read a Book https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Read_a_Book

Because people severely lack media literacy. People say read Orwell… and alt-right was saying it for years too.

There’s someone in this thread saying kids should be forced to read Orwell. Which I think illustrates the issue perfectly…

When I practiced Zen Buddhism formally, yes.

Though I still do open sitting for a few minutes to conclude whatever meditation I was doing. My nonduality teacher recommended it and I found it useful.

Edit: for those interested, The Way app from Henry Shukman is a decent intro to this. Though finding actual Zen Buddhist community is better.

I believed that I had to be certain way in society or I was fundamentally flawed and bad.

I dropped that belief, acknowledge that to some point it’s convenient for me to follow societal norms but trying to fit in makes me mostly miserable. I naturally don’t want to do things that bother other people but I also don’t really want to be around them so why should I try to be likeable to them any more than is normal to me. This way people who like me, are sure to like me as I am. If I like them enough, I’ll naturally also want to be considerate of them, even if I have to occasionally behave a little different.

I somehow made it very complicated with just beating myself up for being bad/stupid/ugly/broken because I kept believing people who I don’t even like.

Wow. You really actually believe that? You actually equate non-dual ideology which necessarily posits a non-hierarchial ultimate reality without absolute good and evil with the bullshit of theistic religions?

Damn I have seen the memes about Marxists thinking they’re way smarter than they are but I thought they were exaggerating.

Removed by mod

For someone harping about science, you certainly fall for logical fallacies a lot. You keep pointing at the extracted brain, textbook appeal to the stone.

You are pointing to contents of consciousness to try to prove matter comes prior.

Maybe take the hint that you don’t understand the argument (and aren’t willing to try) and thus aren’t really equipped for this conversation.

Op made a question I answered. I however did not ask anyone’s opinion.

Because all your proof hinges on matter being real and prior.

regardless of who is percieving it.

And since we require perception to say anything about matter, what does that say about which comes first, matter or consciousness?

Consciousness is a material, measurable process

Again, prove it. It is YOUR system of thought which requires that every claim must be backed with objective proof. Where is the objective proof of matter? All the rest you’re saying hingest upon that being a fact. But if you can’t prove it as a fact, all you have is an unverified belief that you insist everyone else should have. Which, again, makes you exactly the same as any other oppressor. In your own system of thought. And before you parade some scientists in front of me, ask yourself if you can know that they know what they are talking about, or do you just believe them because they share the same core belief system as you?

Oh you were SO CLOSE to getting it.

Why can’t materialists prove it though? By all their own rules, they should.

The ideas of people like Kastrup and Hoffman rely on consciousness being distinct from matter, and not a product of matter.

Yes. Good. You got it. Now definitively prove that consciousness arises from matter and not the other way around. No, brainwave scans exist in consciousness. Everything you say exists in consciousness. Prove to yourself that ANYTHING exists outside your consciousness, prior to thought (as thought is only a reflection of what is, like an image in a mirror but it’s not the thing itself).

Else, you are just insisting that your beliefs are the correct ones without proof. All I need to prove consciousness is be. You’re the one insisting on extra steps. You’re just taking materialism as a fact because that’s what you’re used to doing. You put the block of materialism at the bottom and use the blocks you put on it to try to prove it. This is called circular reasoning.

Removed by mod

Can’t do it huh? For all your talk of science, you sure are ready to take the belief in materialism for granted. Just another belief you demand others have, demand others have the same thoughts as you. The road towards fascism is short indeed.

Unless you can provide scientific proof, I have no reason to subscribe your belief system and neither does anyone else. Go read https://www.bernardokastrup.com/ or https://bradleyhook.com/donald-hoffmans-concepts-simplified-understanding-reality-and-perception/, debunk them and you probably have grounds for your ideology. Else, it’s just another house of cards built on a foundation of fiction.

Nice strawman equating nonduality with flat earth and other materialistic religions. Top critical thinking, very science and logic.

If you are so sure of your stance, prove to me that matter exists outside consciousness. And good goddess, at least try to do better than pointing at an extracted brain will you? Nonduality has been around for thousands of years and it’s yet to be debunked despite there being a very clear criteria for it.