PRINCIPLE OF NON-LOCALITY DIRECT JUMP TO ENLIGHTENMENT

CHARCOtranquilo · 2021-10-24 16:19:29

I will begin this dissertation with a challenging question to your limited ego-centered mind How much distance is there between your awareness of this moment, here and now, and the moment of awareness of the here and now, in Taygeta?....

The answer following the line of thought that establishes the proposition of the "principle of non-locality" would be: none, zero. This propositional logical inference that establishes that "the principle of non-locality", i.e., "consciousness" is not constructed of space, would be correct, but we would only have been motivated to answer from what I personally call, "the intellective or discursive ignorance" which is mainly conditioned by the mind deeply limited by its own ideations which are implicitly subject to the cognitive-perceptive-relativistic (spatio-temporal) foundations within a framework where the consciousness needs the counter-conscience to establish in an arbitrary way illusory references of relation that allow it to unfold in an "illusory externalized perceptual universe" created by the mind-observer.

This dissociation-cognitive-perceptual-projective-illusory dissociation or fragmentation of the unified consciousness into a multiplicity of ideas that oppose and oppose each other in infinite layers of a fractalized kaleidoscopic confusion self-sustained on the basis of the idea of separation from the SOURCE, This is what locks the mind in a dysfunctional loop from which it cannot get out by itself since, as Yazhí says, "What you look for is what you find" or in other words "thoughts cannot leave the source that originated them" (do not confuse "source" in this context with "THE SOURCE" with capital letters UNIFYING-INTEGRATING principle).

Now, as Yazhí says, the philosophical implications "of the principle of non-locality" is the hermeneutics that allows us to develop a theoretical and methodological didactics of this principle that is put into practice in a self-inquiry ("shadow work") whose objective points directly to the final and definitive dissolution of the ego-person-individuality and as a result of this dissolution the emergence to the vivid and REAL Understanding (not the product of the intellectual mind completely disconnected from THE SOURCE which is the source of the reality). individuality and as a result of this dissolution the emergence to the vivid and REAL Understanding (not the product of the intellective mind completely disconnected from THE SOURCE that repeats and borrows universal truths in a purely theoretical context without understanding absolutely nothing of the deep implications of what it affirms) that one IS THE SOURCE.

It is for this reason that my constructive criticism is directed to this disclosure of the absence of a practical methodology of this much needed "shadow work" that Yazhi urgently summons us to carry out, since it is the quintessential symbolic transmutation that in a convoluted way develops the spiritual alchemy that "turns lead into gold" (understand this as a metaphor of the so-called enlightenment).

The principle of non-locality reveals in its own wickerwork the verified fact that if space does not exist, neither do the objects that are supposed to be contained in that non-existent space. Since every object, in order to be perceived as such, needs a relative spatial frame where to circumscribe the idea of volume and distance with respect to the same perceptive conceptualization that supposes "the idea of space" and that inexcusably carries with it "the idea of time". This places us unfailingly in a terrain where the logical-intellectual mind cannot glimpse how is that REALITY absent of objects and also something fundamental: absent of the idea of an observer or perceptive subject. This which, for the perceptive and detached mind, implies understanding this as the idea of an obscure and vertiginous void or of a nihilistic nothingness is nevertheless the fulcrum that will allow us to discard everything that IS NOT THE SOURCE.
I will now formulate a series of methodological questions based on this "principle of non-locality that will allow you to verify your reality first hand.

Ask yourself:

In what place "of the space" you now observe and in which you "seem to be contained" is this space contained? Where does the space that contains this space you observe arise from? How much space does a thought about space contain?

Now try to find the limits of that idea of space that arises from the mind... Does that idea of space contain you or are you the invisible container of that space from where the very idea of a space arises? And if you observe yourself as the invisible container of that space, where are you located in that idea of space? Does that idea of space contain a tangible body in a defined place where you can locate that body? How big is that body in that idea of space? Is it big, small? Or is it just a tiny nothingness that you cannot find as a tangible reality in that idea of space that your mind has created? Is it not true, that this idea of the existence of a body in some recess of your mind, is only a vaguely indefinite construct that your mind identifies as "I"? Does this "I" contain you as an idea or is it you that has given content to this "I" in an indefinite place in some recondite non-space of your mind? Is it not rather the empty mind the container of all possible contents, "a nothing" where you cannot find limits established by an increasing or decreasing magnitude?

Now observe your mind, can any idea of space, fill it with any idea of space or yet that space which is your mind, does not need any idea for that empty open space which is your mind to exist free of content without you being present remembering it? Does any thought arising from that vast space which is your mind change some of the thoughts arising from your mind? Can this mind be disturbed by the summed totality of all conceived objects? totality of all conceivable objects both physical and mental?

Can it make this space that is its mind disappear, destroy it, fragment it into multiple spaces? Is it not invulnerable to any thought of destruction arising from this same space? Is this not a tangible proof that the space that is its mind is never a thought because if it were so it could be made to disappear just as it appears and disappears the innumerable thoughts that it has throughout the day?
Well, we have already verified that the mind, that which IS, absent of ideas, is not a thought that creates space in the mind. And if it is not a thought that creates space, that means that the existence of the mind, does not depend on whether or not there is space. Therefore, from what no space do you see yourself?

Charcotranquilo

Last edited by CHARCOtranquilo (2021-10-24 22:39:56)

CHARCOtranquilo · 2021-10-24 22:00:23

Brahman wrote:

. He says that the mind / thought does not exist. That is all. When asked why he is here, he says that he does not exist either. So I chose him as my (non)guru. Lol. It's like zen.

So in a good (non) choice.

CHARCOtranquilo · 2021-10-26 18:06:21

CHARCOtranquilo · 2021-10-26 22:07:53

Genoveva wrote:

There is still one aspect left to clarify: whose self? It's Source Self.

In the absence of you, how is the Source and who remains?...

Last edited by CHARCOtranquilo (2021-10-26 22:24:13)

CHARCOtranquilo · 2021-10-26 22:32:35

Explanatory note: Children before birth already come with all the cognitive load of duality in their unconscious, so it cannot be said that a child by the simple fact that the identification "I" (self-consciousness) has not yet been expressed through language means that "he/she is closer to the Source". The child's mind needs dual contrasts for learning, both motor, and the development of attention, language, etc., in order to develop in the environment. Moreover, the very fact of incarnation is the most revealing indicator that the germ of duality is latent in the incarnating consciousness, even before birth in a biological body.

Last edited by CHARCOtranquilo (2021-10-26 22:33:42)

mitkobs · 2021-10-27 09:03:17

If something cannot be defined that's it, nothing can be said about it. We cannot in any way with any words or ideas to describe it. Thus we cannot say it is nothingness or emptyness. It is beyond the framework of possible understanding.

CHARCOtranquilo · 2021-10-27 12:49:04

Genoveva wrote:

OK, first of all, duality is not a damnation - it is a prerequisite for incarnation.

Yes, duality is not a condemnation, because it is not a sin, it is an error of perception and as an error it can be corrected.

Genoveva wrote:

Consciousness can incarnate only by making use of duality, otherwise consciousness is unmovable - in other words it cannot manifest anything without duality

Correct. Duality is only expressed through projection which is the effect of fragmentation or separation with the Source.

Genoveva wrote:

Source/pure consciousness wants to experience itself.

This statement is a humanization of the ego's desire for experience. "Experience" requires processes and every process is inexorably linked to time and space. THE SOURCE, however, being outside of time and space DOES NOT NEED TO EXPERIENCE ITSELF in order to know itself (this "knowing" does not involve projection as it does in the "ego", nor does it have anything to do with the idea knowing, such as data, objects, ideas, experiences, universes, multiverses, extraterrestrials etc.) The Source has NEVER incarnated nor will it ever incarnate to experience itself, for if it did, it would be ontologically contradictory since it would imply that that which is Perfect and Complete also harbors lack and imperfection as compatible opposites.

What can the Source know of ephemerality, of lack, of ignorance, and of experiences that require processes that fade in time? Can pain be part of peace, or grief part of bliss? How could fear, sickness and death enter the Source as experience and thus "know itself and then extol its perfection? Source accepts no exceptions or, in other words, TRUTH MAKES NO EXCEPTIONS WITH THAT WHICH IS ILLUSORY AND BELONGS TO TIME.

Genoveva wrote:

Try to spend 24 hours with a little child, try to not tend to their needs during this interval (because they don't exist in terms of space & time). Hmm, they will not be quiet - which means that they do occupy a space, their biological cycles do imply that time exists.

Of course the child exists. No one denies its existence in the world of time, that is to say, in the world of the dream, BUT FOR ETERINITY, THAT IS TO SAY, FOR THE SOURCE IT DOES NOT EXIST because of what I have already stated above.

Genoveva wrote:

Perfection is very boring.

This is still a humanization of the needs of lack, sickness, and ego death.

Genoveva wrote:

That's according to earth patriarchal view. However, if we think of source as the eternal feminine energy... well, let's not calculate the implications, right now. Lol

Their compelling need to anthropomorphize the Source as something feminine as opposed to the terrible male patriarchy is nothing more than falling into the same conceptual error as theologians unfortunately did in times past.

The Source transcends gender and to associate any gender with the Source is to prostitute its genuine meaning.

Robert369 · 2021-10-27 17:47:08

Genoveva wrote:

CHARCOtranquilo wrote:
…, duality is … an error of perception and as an error it can be corrected.
Well, how can duality be an error of perception?

Indeed so: Duality is a choice, firstly at a higher level before incarnation, then during an incarnation one can learn to decide which duality items one wishes to have in this life.

Calling intentional choices for duality an error equals Source to be an error. Now that's a new one !

CHARCOtranquilo · 2021-10-27 21:37:50

Genoveva wrote:

However, it appears that the only correction would be to observe both sides of the duality in simultaneity. Is this what you meant by ‘correction’?

"Correctness" would imply seeing all these interpretative constructs as illusory. Mere concepts product of a dialectic of complementary opposites of orientalist cut that try to trap the ungraspable by attributing qualities to the Source NOT attributable to what cannot be trapped neither by language nor by thought, imagination, or fantasy.

Genoveva wrote:

Each attribute (frequency) is infinite. I.e. love is infinite, and no matter how much love energy is accumulated by one creature within their structure, it will never deplete the love energy which can be accessed by the rest of the creation.

If love is infinite its opposite is also infinite and will never exhaust the energy of "hate" that can be accessed by the rest of creation?

However, the opposite of "Love" (ONENESS) is NOT indifference it is, SEPARATION FROM THE SOURCE, the effects of which are fear, isolation, and guilt. Indifference is only a euphemism for more fear. Of course when I speak in this context of "love" I am not referring to the psycho-affective, sentimental aspect of couple, family, maternal or paternal-subsidiary or other worldly affective relationships. THIS HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SACRED NAME OF LOVE.

Genoveva wrote:

Actually, no! This is about the characteristics of yin and yang energies. Such as: one expands, the other contracts. One is cold, the other is hot. The dynamic of these characteristics is the one which makes manifestation possible. Their duality.
From this perspective, Source transcends gender (actually more accurately it refers to yin/yang type of energy, and not to 'gender') only prior to manifestation.
In manifestation, Source is not neutral. Indian tradition says: “Shiva without Shakti is Shava” (Yang (masculine) without Yin (feminine) is a corpse).
And every single particle in manifestation is Source.

I insist, the SOURCE cannot contain opposites (it is an ontological aberration) otherwise it would lose its NON-dual quality.
I will express it in the following way paraphrasing Yazhi: "evil", (i.e. ILLUSION) is entropic which means that it cannot subsist from itself, in itself and by itself and for itself. Therefore, ONLY the Source, IS.

Robert369 · 2021-10-27 23:48:57

CHARCOtranquilo wrote:

If love is infinite its opposite is also infinite and will never exhaust the energy of "hate" that can be accessed by the rest of creation?

With "love" we are talking e.g. of higher or lower frequency (which is part of the energy that gets transmitted), which cannot be turned into an opposite "because "zero frequency" is the lower limit.

This means that since love is high frequency energy, and its opposite is not "anti-energy" but the lack of energy, meaning that is cannot extend into "infinite negative energy" but only towards zero energy or frequency.

Of course, "hate" (which is lack of love and not "anti-love") can also be powerful (which gets reflected as amplitude) but so can love, and since the overall energy level corresponds to the square of frequency and amplitude (E~f²xU²), love will usually be stronger.

In fact, "opposites" are only defined by perception or collective agreements and not actually existing, because the original Aether equilibrium which gets disturbed by conscousiness attention points will always be Aether, meaning it will simply be different but never an opposite, e.g. "differently distorted equilibrium Aether".

Last edited by Robert369 (2021-10-27 23:58:04)

mitkobs · 2021-10-28 05:08:08

There is no opposite to LOVE and there is no opposite to Light. There is only absence of these two that makes all that is not Love and all that is not Light. And absence is lack, it is never abundance. Those who are in such state are beggars for Love and Light. And this absence lead to self destruction and destruction in general.

CHARCOtranquilo · 2021-10-28 15:48:50

Genoveva wrote:

With this one phrase you unlocked for me a whole world. Thank you @CHARCOtranquilo! I can read this whole thread with a different understanding. It's so simple and elegant! I'll re-read it tomorrow (and meditate).

I'm glad you've allowed yourself to look at yourself with new eyes.

This is what the job is all about: questioning is fundamental as long as there is no cynical or disbelieving animosity that only seeks to shore up their own reasoning by systematically disqualifying and discarding anything that does not align with their beliefs or also the childish polarized reactive posture of systematically taking the opposite in a dialectical competition even knowing that their reasoning is flagrantly inconsistent; just like the cynical person they only seek to feed their reasons, only in this case, the stimulus is to always win at any cost to increase an infantile self-esteem.This type of attitude results in the blocking of skills that allow opening the mind to a view devoid of false prejudices or gratuitous assumptions.

On the contrary, genuine questioning, shows a sincere honesty to find THE TRUTH (not my reasons, borrowed from others, which I collect without having verified the content of their REALITY), for which a self-investigative mind free of prejudices is required to allow me a new, fresh look, which enlivens the intelligence to expand it with equanimity .

Nothing can be taken for granted, wherever it comes from and whoever it comes from. Only YOU can verify the reality of each proposition that allows you to turn your mind on yourself and leads you to that TRUTH, real, solid, certain, that lies in the center without limits of each Soul.

Genoveva wrote:

Long time ago, one of the most beloved teachers in the school asked our class, (16 years olds), to find a verb which is synonymous with the verb "to love". None of us gave a satisfactory answer. Fortunately, we convinced him to tell us his interpretation. His equivalent for the verb "to love" was "to give".

Great!

Genoveva wrote:

To give yourself to Source = to drop the illusion of separation. In "THE SACRED NAME OF LOVE".

This is the path without a path, the surrender that involves freeing the mind from the mind itself.

Last edited by CHARCOtranquilo (2021-10-29 13:49:49)

#1 2021-10-24 16:19:29

PRINCIPLE OF NON-LOCALITY DIRECT JUMP TO ENLIGHTENMENT

#2 2021-10-24 22:00:23

Re: PRINCIPLE OF NON-LOCALITY DIRECT JUMP TO ENLIGHTENMENT

#3 2021-10-26 18:06:21

Re: PRINCIPLE OF NON-LOCALITY DIRECT JUMP TO ENLIGHTENMENT

#4 2021-10-26 22:07:53

Re: PRINCIPLE OF NON-LOCALITY DIRECT JUMP TO ENLIGHTENMENT

#5 2021-10-26 22:32:35

Re: PRINCIPLE OF NON-LOCALITY DIRECT JUMP TO ENLIGHTENMENT

#6 2021-10-27 09:03:17

Re: PRINCIPLE OF NON-LOCALITY DIRECT JUMP TO ENLIGHTENMENT

#7 2021-10-27 12:49:04

Re: PRINCIPLE OF NON-LOCALITY DIRECT JUMP TO ENLIGHTENMENT

#8 2021-10-27 17:47:08

Re: PRINCIPLE OF NON-LOCALITY DIRECT JUMP TO ENLIGHTENMENT

#9 2021-10-27 21:37:50

Re: PRINCIPLE OF NON-LOCALITY DIRECT JUMP TO ENLIGHTENMENT

#10 2021-10-27 23:48:57

Re: PRINCIPLE OF NON-LOCALITY DIRECT JUMP TO ENLIGHTENMENT

#11 2021-10-28 05:08:08

Re: PRINCIPLE OF NON-LOCALITY DIRECT JUMP TO ENLIGHTENMENT

#12 2021-10-28 15:48:50

Re: PRINCIPLE OF NON-LOCALITY DIRECT JUMP TO ENLIGHTENMENT

Board footer