Thanks for your response.DooDoot wrote: ↑Tue Feb 26, 2019 12:33 am The below sounds like Hinduism & Brahman.The above doesn't sound like Nirvana in Buddhism and the final stage of the experiential doctrine of Buddhism. Its sounds like Hinduism.First, there must be consciousness. Only then can a concept of consciousness arise. The mind is an instrument of consciousness through which thoughts are perceived. That which perceives this concept of consciousness is consciousness: that is you, and not the concept that you have of consciousness. In other words; from your consciousness you can not conceptualize consciousness, for you are consciousness. Consciousness cannot be conceptualized in any way because it precedes and surpasses all concepts.
We thus perceive reality, via stimuli, within ourselves. However, we, ourselves are consciousness. As a result, we are not ‘selves’, but only reality. You can not explain yourself. This, of course, does not mean that what is perceived can have no meaning. As described before; conceptualizing is meaningful by definition.
Summarizing the above; you are consciousness, so you perceive reality (through stimuli) within yourself. Since, however, you are consciousness and only perceive, you thus perceive reality as yourself. If you perceive reality as yourself, you are not yourself, but only reality [Brahman]. So there is no self, but only reality [Brahman].
Understanding the above creates a radical change in the way reality is perceived. You are aware that you are the awareness of reality and are not separate from it. You are everything that happens in your environment and body, because you perceive this. This gives you a deeper connection with people, animals, plants and things from your environment, which is expressed in a (deep) sense of sympathy, compassion or loving kindness. This feeling arises because you no longer perceive from your person, but from reality, and realize that everything from reality is connected with your body and each other. This experiential knowledge, together with the extinguishing (enlightening) of your egocentric desires and emotions, is called Nirvana in Buddhism and is the final stage of the experiential doctrine of Buddhism. To fully understand the above, you need insight into the rest of reality.
First & foremost, Nirvana is the ending of dukkha. The above ideas about Nirvana never appear to mention this. In other words, when the mind (not "we" or "you") lets go of identification, this is peaceful; this is free.After gaining insight into mutual dependent arising and the emptiness of essence, we are left with consciousness; we perceive something. We now know that if something is formed, for instance a flower, we can’t define it by merely observing its physical presence. The flower also needs everything around the physical presence of the flower to be the flower. This means that without the air, the soil, the sun, et cetera, the flower would not be there. Therefore, the flower can’t be truly defined as it needs everything to exist and consequently its essence is empty. So nothing is truly formed, because we can’t really define something. If we identify or define something, this is only a mental fabrication. But we still experience ‘things,’ so these ‘things’ are without form.....
....We are merely a mental fabrication from the attempt to identify and define ourselves out of ignorance. The ignorance that there truly is nothing to permanently identify with. The moment you have let go of the identification with form, you are left with the identification with the formless. Although you do not define a form anymore, you do recognize you experience something. We attain Nirvana when we also have let go of the identification with the formless. We are conscious that nothing is formed, as the essence of form is empty. This means that something is without form. However, also the essence of the formless is empty and is therefore nothing. So nothing is formed and nothing is without form. Nothing does not come and nothing does not go. Nothing is permanent, everything is impermanent. We dissolved into nothingness, as we were nothing to begin with.
Welcome Peter. I browsed some of what you wrote. Many of your paragraphs about 'ego', 'preference', 'expectation' & 'dukkha' were very well explained. Some paragraphs are very well written, such as the last paragraph of 'Ego and emotions'. However, I think a lot of what you wrote sounds like plagiarism.
I just said that we are only consciousness, which is empty as it is only perception. I am not saying there is nothing outside our consciousness.
When you realize you are nothing, dukkha is also ended as suffering starts with identifying the formless and after that through defining form.
Everywhere I used texts from other people I used references. To just blame me for possible plagiarism without any evidence says more about you than about the text.