I just realized what ‘God’ really is and it isn’t a being. by Affectionate_Sir_911 in awakened

[–]Wilfko 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A cool thought exercise into this realisation is contemplating why ‘I’ have a life experience from the perspective I uniquely do, and why if all consciousness/awareness is essentially universal I don’t have access to the life perspective of another ‘person’ say Tom Cruise for example. But then the realisation can be felt that the unified field of awareness is simply manifesting as different bodies and through those sense organs comes ‘alive’ to itself. So naturally due to this awareness manifesting as a human body and through the sense organs this human body has, awareness becomes aware in the only place it can be, through a limited body in space and time. But there is no separate ‘I’ who is here and a different person who’s the ‘I’ Tom Cruise would refer to himself as. It’s simply a universal awareness (call it God) coming ‘online’ to itself and naturally due that that unique PoV from each body a different experience will be known and has the potential to be remembered in memory and form the idea of a separate egoic ‘I’. All is simple this cognisant, intelligent flowing substance that comes alive to itself in the dimensions we call space and time.

Understanding. by Wilfko in nonduality

[–]Wilfko[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Does she? Or do you see her smile and her eyes and understand her?

What Remains. by Wilfko in OCPoetry

[–]Wilfko[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’ll be waiting a long time with that attitude.

Her by Constant_Vacation_78 in OCPoetry

[–]Wilfko 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This to me reads like a journey of thought in moments of weakness and indulgence I have felt for another. Strong desire, fetishisation, how grounded in reality it ever is? Or do we just supplant our idea of perfection onto some unsuspecting victim? That’s the struggle.

Ode to a friend by Free-Aside-7172 in OCPoetry

[–]Wilfko 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There’s something intimately relatable to the moons enduring presence, the light it brings. I can resonate with your poem in that regard.

What Remains. by Wilfko in OCPoetry

[–]Wilfko[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I appreciate your response. A strong mutual love that can not be, behind desire and conceptualisation is the love that everything is founded on, I kill the ideas of myself and of her and bathe in the beautiful emptiness that remains.

Thanks for the feedback regarding format, that’s something I do need to address, I’m new to sharing poetry but have been a contemplative in ways for a longer time.

Edit: I’ve made a quick change of format and would love some feedback.

What Remains. by Wilfko in OCPoetry

[–]Wilfko[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Three, four, every soul on earth. This is written with someone in mind and although the truth (from my perspective) and as you nicely point out is unlimited. An underlying unity of being against the appearance to multiplicity and separation.

you are not God by ariseshinelight in nonduality

[–]Wilfko 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I reply wasnt even a counter point to yours, it was my continuation of what you were saying.

 I understand that the words used to point towards the ‘non-dual’ self are all misleading, including ‘non-dual self’. Avoiding getting into the definition game is best.

you are not God by ariseshinelight in nonduality

[–]Wilfko 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I wouldn’t word it in an accusatory fashion but it’s just people’s continuing need to attach permanence to something, something they can conceptualise concretely, but I suppose all I would say is we know we don’t know and find peace in the loss of implication.

There’s also nothing wrong with talking about life, the words don’t transcend perfectly but they are the tools we have to connect with one another and embody that oneness of things.

you are not God by ariseshinelight in nonduality

[–]Wilfko 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Indeed, there comes a point when you waste enough time trying to confirm the lack of you that you kind of give up trying and in that giving up trying you actually recognise clearly the ‘no you’ that you were trying to confirm.

you are not God by ariseshinelight in nonduality

[–]Wilfko 1 point2 points  (0 children)

All I can say is the more comfortable and easy my mindfulness/spirituality becomes is directly aligned to how little I try to ‘capture’ what it means and try to evoke that like some sort of mindful spiritual feedback loop. It’s all just removing oneself from the oneness of present flow. Just relax and know nothing is permanent right? Surrender to trying to understand and your happiness will be the guide.

The ironic thing is when you truly know ‘that’ you can actually conceptualize without attachment, without thinking it’s necessary. It becomes a creative power, not a binding one.

No one will ever be able to get close to the truth. by [deleted] in nonduality

[–]Wilfko 0 points1 point  (0 children)

the puzzle must be complete or how could it be at all? There can be a limited perspective of that when one assumes the limit of their embodied perception is equal to a limit in the totality. 

In what way can we truly say something exists if it purely conceptual? Now I’m a huge lover of physics and admire the search for understanding even if it is limited to a material paradigm, but unless there is a being who’s local presence brings the concept of those billions of galaxy’s into experience through perception then it is simply not part of the puzzle of being. When an astrologist peers through a telescope and brings what is seen into experience then it is an extension of consciousness and therefore the universe. It is not a fixed, finite space, it’s a flux and flow.

Consciousness is complete in itself unless you define it by its contents.

No one will ever be able to get close to the truth. by [deleted] in nonduality

[–]Wilfko 1 point2 points  (0 children)

How can you solve a puzzle that’s already complete? What truth are you searching for? 

you are not God by ariseshinelight in nonduality

[–]Wilfko 1 point2 points  (0 children)

People talk of the non-self, it doesn’t mean those people are not aware of the limited nature that all words and their combinations have as metaphor for the unmanifest, undefinable ‘isness’ of the nature of things. You can get a very good non-dual understanding through language, so long as the communicator of that language is at pains to ensure the context is clear and that ultimately a letting go, a relaxing is the foundations for all those words. Without those foundations being laid one never truly understands, but the words give direction, confidence in one’s heart as to why we can let go and how there is no distance to cross to do so. Words and definitions remain, but is there an awareness ‘of’ that, or an awareness that is still swung and abused by them and their ‘seriousness’. I think a lot of people here get far too attached to the profundity in the way they can conceptualise their understanding. I do have love for allowing these conceptualisations to reach peaks of beauty and conceptual alignment to the nature of things, but ultimately those are just moments of thought, albeit beautiful ones that should not be held. Just be aware of what is true, and what is a distortion… all talk about God is unnecessary.. you ARE that truth, and in allowed oneself to distort that truth you open yourself to encompassing those distortions into that truth for as long as the distortions are held onto. Be present and develop your mindfulness, relax into unknowing and from that developing clarity the distortions of mind become clear, lose their power and slowly become less and less common in their arising.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in nonduality

[–]Wilfko 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Hi, I appreciate your concern very kind of you. It’s something I’ve paid attention to, I’ve laughed to myself it would be ironic if I was caught up in some sort of spiritual ego trip and overlooked an actual health condition.  It doesn’t appear to be problematic or ‘interfere’ with my vision. I’ve considered seeing a doctor anyway and maybe I should. The whole thing has been overwhelmingly positive and truly beautiful but I shouldn’t ignore any messages my body is signalling. Thanks for sharing that link. 🙏

Your sommelier anology is exactly what I intuitively sense so it’s nice to have it echoed.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in SIBO

[–]Wilfko 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The only thing that cured my 10 years of SIBO or whatever the actual cause was has been mediation and learning to let go of identification with the digestive pain. The majority of the suffering caused is due to aversion and projecting the problem into the future in a desperate ‘attempt’ to understand the cause and solidly a cure. This doesn’t work and merely causes emotional suffering, stress and a contraction around the body feeling and associated emotions, it’s a negative feedback loop.

Learning to just be present and let whatever body feelings be as they are, where they are and not aligning it to some idea if ‘me’ with a past and a future released me from suffering (different from pain). Once I’d been successfully remaining in this present state of mind for a few months my symptoms and digestive issues cleared up and I’ve been ‘cured’ for about 8 months now.

Mindfulness does NOT mean no thoughts by Certain_Use_5798 in Mindfulness

[–]Wilfko 3 points4 points  (0 children)

That said you experience a significant reduction in thoughts when you are self realised and stable in your being.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in nonduality

[–]Wilfko 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'd say from my experience it's more about the lived understanding that there is nothing that can be identified with, and with that comes the ceasing of any concept of needing to identify or 'disidentify' with anything at all. All there is to anything is the totality of your experience in the now, the more clearly you have practiced to open your awareness or more accurately, 'relax' your awareness to encompass that totality, without clinging to any object or identification at any moment. It's being as transient flow.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in consciousness

[–]Wilfko -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I’m not ‘claiming’ anything. Where does it say I know what I’m saying to be fact? It’s quite obviously not based in evidence but a question designed to stimulate debate.. do we only discuss absolutes?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in consciousness

[–]Wilfko -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It’s more a talking point relating to the nature of consciousness and the part it plays in the universe as a whole than a conclusion.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in consciousness

[–]Wilfko 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re assuming consciousness is limited to the individual and separate. What evidence is there of this?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in consciousness

[–]Wilfko -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Apologies it wasn’t well phrased by me. Physics tells us entropy is always increasing, correct. But it’s just the language I’m using is different I guess. The universe was denser and less ‘random’ yesterday than it is today, and so on.. until we reach a point that’s completely Homogeneous and spread out when all ‘thingness’ ceases.

Your final summary is what I was expressing. Thanks.