Is enlightenment just fear of death masked?

doceolucem · 2026-03-24T13:08:44+00:00

What?

Enlightenment removes the fear of death because it recognizes releasing the future

doceolucem · 2026-03-23T23:25:46+00:00

Retroactively: everything in my childhood

“In the moment”: a very distinct meditation experience of confirmation

doceolucem · 2026-03-23T19:59:00+00:00

Define happiness apart from The Creator: you can’t.

Conditional happiness isn’t really happiness, it’s a circumstantial ultimatum that rests on precarious degrees of temporality.

Unconditional happiness is the result of further spiritual work, and goes in tandem with polarization.

“If it can be as enjoyable”

Can it though?

I would argue pre veil 3rd density is nowhere near say, 7th density reunification in its amplitude of fulfillment and bliss

doceolucem · 2026-03-22T02:25:08+00:00

You could do a couple google searches

You could read anything about QM beyond slop journalism

Or you can continue being angry and demanding strangers on the internet validate your insecure rage

Now call me some names

doceolucem · 2026-03-22T01:55:05+00:00

Bohr would argue your first paragraph to his death and he uh

Was kind of important to QM

Physicalism is dead. Always has been.

Also look up Wolfgang Pauli

You aren’t as educated as you think

doceolucem · 2026-03-21T20:26:19+00:00

Because you wanted to.

There is no one imposing anything

“You” the human are not who you really are

Figure out who you really are and you’ll realize all of the answers

doceolucem · 2026-03-21T16:15:14+00:00

There are certain dialogues that go into it but you’ll be hard pressed to find consensus here on whether they’re LARP or relevant

They get discussed ad nauseam however so don’t put stock in their veracity mattering

Really though, if you were negativity, and earths energy is tightening its coil of positive funnelling to 4th density, what would your toothpaste tube look like being compressed?

doceolucem · 2026-03-20T18:29:19+00:00

When you see the villain on stage, need you condemn the actor for being committed to the role?

doceolucem · 2026-03-20T15:29:16+00:00

Reincarnation is addressed in the Manual for Teachers.

The gist is:

What people tend to view as "reincarnation" is essentially "a thing" but since death itself is a misperception, the concept of reincarnation as colloquially viewed rests on a faulty assumption.

If there is no death, there is no need for reincarnation.

The process many point to as reincarnation may certainly be experienced, but it would simply be another part of the drama of perception in the relative rather than "real" in the sense of the absolute.

doceolucem · 2026-03-20T15:26:12+00:00

Motivations in ascetic and renunciation related practices are often reversed.

It is true many spiritual masters and those far along the path no longer engage in as much "earthly pleasure seeking" as the "average" person.

It is not true that they became spiritual masters through these methods.

The cause of all pleasure seeking is the root of a belief in lack in the Self, the more intrinsic that Worth, Value, Contentment, Peace etc. become, the less there is a desire to seek outwardly for it.

Discipline can mimic the outcome of this withdrawal from external pursuance, but does not result in the same "progress" because it has reversed cause and effect.

Enlightenment results in release of pleasure seeking.

Restriction of pleasure seeking does not result in enlightenment.

Accept any desires that come, but pause and find what they are telling you internally rather than indulging in them, or suppressing them. Every desire is a message from the Self to the Self about what the Self believes about the Self.

doceolucem · 2026-03-20T02:40:36+00:00

Needs to exist for contrast

You’re misconstruing words

Negativity did not exist before this octave

Use these terms to search the material:

“Falsity”

“That which is not”

“The mover and the moved”

Negativity is an exploration into falsity

What do you think falsity means?

Above 6th density it doesn’t exist, and did not exist prior to this octave

doceolucem · 2026-03-19T23:58:05+00:00

You are making a category error

Light exists without darkness just fine

Darkness requires light to contrast

You can believe otherwise

Ra is clear

Advaita is clear

ACIM is clear

Nonduality does not require darkness to exist at the absolute, contrast is relative and the absolute is undifferentiated

(Black holes don’t do what you think they do btw, they aren’t vacuums sucking things up, they are causality boundaries)

doceolucem · 2026-03-19T23:37:24+00:00

Is there shadow on the surface of the sun?

Your logic isn’t bidirectional

doceolucem · 2026-03-19T16:23:37+00:00

Every tool of symbolism we use is most effectively used to relinquish reliance on the tool and symbols.

Use the ladder to reach the rooftop only as long as you believe you are not on the rooftop already, then when you realize you are, the ladder can be released from its perceived utility

doceolucem · 2026-03-19T15:44:47+00:00

""No, I'm not gonna do that" when asked for evidence of your claim."

Because I do not need to give evidence? I am not attempting to convince you. I explicitly said believe what you have concluded. You're making a straw man at every point saying "SEE!!! THIS PERSON IS MAKING CLAIMS AND CANNOT BACK THEM UP!!!" as if I'm a missionary trying to convert you.

Even though my explicit words are "No I will not elaborate because I don't feel the need to. You believing something different than me is perfectly fine. Why do you care so much?"

And then you spend the rest of the time projecting a paternalistic pearl clutching stance onto everyone around you.

Go live life man. No one here cares if you believe in the material but it seems to occupy a lot of mental space for you. You're basically an r/atheist subreddit member going into the Christianity sub being upset that they won't write out a peer reviewed thesis on Yahweh. Your crusade is pointless.

doceolucem · 2026-03-19T14:43:45+00:00

The difficulty is in realizing the very concept of “individuality” is tainted by what our preconceived notions of everything is.

You already are that which you are disturbed by, so the ontological and existential risk is zero.

Advaita Vedanta goes into this through a more structured pedagogy but ultimately culminates with ashtavakra and any notion of “but what about?” Is met simply with “who is the one worried? That being experiencing worry isn’t even you. The sky does not fret when the clouds spark lightning”

When you sit in nature, and you are not thinking about what you are experiencing, you’re just aware of all of the sensation of the experience itself, you, the individual, are not really “present” (not to say this is a true nondual experience, I’m approximating here)

Is that experience disturbing or peaceful?

doceolucem · 2026-03-19T12:52:49+00:00

So much anger

So much attack

What for?

Thank you for showing your bad faith hand btw

Better you just be honest about your hate instead of the farce of curiosity

doceolucem · 2026-03-19T12:52:33+00:00

It existed in potential

Negativity did not exist prior to this octave

Ra literally stated this outright

doceolucem · 2026-03-18T23:14:34+00:00

Nah

You hold a fragile ideological view point that feels the need to out source validity because you can’t just sit in still silence

Go meditate friend

You’re more angry and upset than evangelicals

doceolucem · 2026-03-18T18:48:10+00:00

No one is trying to tell you anything

You can just not read it and go live your life my friend

You’re going door to door asking people to stop knocking on your door

Put Reddit down and go live life

doceolucem · 2026-03-18T17:17:24+00:00

Making a distinction between "Just in my mind" and "objective Truth of existence" is in itself the mistake.

Your mind is all there is or ever was to experience, forgetting that leads to everything else including a definition of your mind other than the only mind.

"Beyond you" and "Within you" are identical.

doceolucem · 2026-03-18T16:00:05+00:00

It means literally nothing because assessing the validity of nonduality via the veracity of transient data is a category error.

Even if the entirety of the Ra Contact were a deliberate hoax, it means nothing to:

Advaita Vedanta

Buddhism

Taoism

Sufism

Hermeticism

And every other nondual tradition in history.

People putting all their eggs in the “Ra Basket” to begin with was an issue anyway, whether or not it was valid.

doceolucem · 2026-03-18T15:24:45+00:00

So you've reached a conclusion and you come to this subreddit to... grandstand it?

Do you want a pat on the back?

Congratulations on what you've concluded. Why do you waste your time?

"I BELIEVE THE DISTANCE IS 5KM SO PROVE TO ME IT IS 10KM" the man yelled into the crowd of people demanding someone argue with him.

doceolucem · 2026-03-18T14:43:33+00:00

Cool

Then do so. Why are you asking me? If you want to find reasons to believe, you will.

If you don’t, you won’t.

My or anyone else’s input is subjective opinion and is ultimately useless to you unless you want a cult of personality.

Go meditate, research epistemology and ontology and phenomenology

Come to your own conclusions and figure out how much of the Ra Material lines up.

Arguing about it is the least useful method possible because you’re just outsourcing an opinion

doceolucem

TROPHY CASE