8:44 _"The self is a linguistic trick, it's a trick of language."_ With all due respect to the guest here, this is too simplistic and reductionistic, in my opinion. Sure, there's a linguistic _component_ involved as clearly most of our thoughts revolve around "I-me-mine." But the self illusion goes far deeper than being just a trick of language, or a mere figment of thought. First, I would say that a part of the trickiness is that we tend to want to think of this in terms of a *thing* ("the self"), whereas the phenomenon is more of an activity - a sort of habitual reflexive contraction into an apparent subject experiencing a world of objects. The fact that there is no such subject (nor actual self-existent objects) doesn't mean the illusion of one goes away (or even weakens) just by using language that's not self-oriented, as he seems to suggest here. This illusion goes deep because it began getting inculcated fairly early in life, and became energetically reinforced in countless ways over many years of normal learning and cognitive development. This is why it seems that the most truly liberating awakenings tend to happen over successive realizations, and tend to be subtractive or deconditioning in nature. It took a lot to build the identity, so it'll probably take a lot of undoing to collapse it. (There might be exceptions to this, of course.) 11:35 _"That illusion, that sense of ownership... if you buy into it... yeah, you'll take better care of your body, you'll take better care of the stuff that you 'own'."_ I'm not so sure about that. Consider the many, many people from all walks of life who take poor care of themselves, even to the point of jeopardizing their health and lifespan, and who also don't particularly care so well for the things they own, and yet these same people have every bit as much a sense of self and doership as anyone else. 33:54 _"The left brain is a storyteller, so it creates the stories, but the right brain is really far more into reality._ [...] _The left brain stories, if they get too out of line with reality, then the right brain steps in, and it steps in and it corrects the left brain."_ Really? I wonder how this conceptualization squares with research showing that it's the _right_ brain that's mostly involved in clinical depression, including distorted thinking patterns and over-fixation on negative emotions. In those cases, the left brain would actually serve the healthy balancing or compensating function he's attributing to the right brain in his example here. Maybe I'm misreading him, but it just seems like there's a lot of vilifying of the left brain and its analytic thinking role, along with an over-exaltation of the right brain as being totally in touch with reality at all times - almost like there's supposedly a good hemisphere and a bad hemisphere. Another point is that brain lateralization doesn't seem to be as exclusive or absolute as what seems to be getting suggested in this conversation. For example, the overall hemispheric emphasis can differ to some extent based on whether one is right handed or left handed. All that said, I'm also aware that the guest has a Ph.D. in cognitive neuropsychology, while I most definitely do not. So, take my feedback here with the appropriate grains of salt. Regarding thinking, which is presented here as a big problem, I wouldn't say the only two possibilities are to either have a quiet mind and no suffering, or to have a busy mind and suffer. Many times an awakening shift happens but does not completely quiet the mind. The mind might get quietER, particularly the self-referential thoughts, but there are still thoughts and thinking. In fact, my observation over the years is that it's rare for even a big realization to result in (or coincide with) the sort of complete quietening of the mind Gary Weber has talked about. Be that as it may, it seems to me the core issue isn't the presence or absence of thoughts, but how and to what extent thoughts are identified with - i.e., invested with the energy of belief combined with a lack of perspective about them and about who or what one is apart from thinking.
Love your comment, thank you for taking time and expressing your point. Seeing through language is one step, and it is an important step, but as you say, there is more to it. The contraction of “me” needs to be examined experientially and it’s not likely to resolve just by seeing that I is a thought. Seeing through the story is a good start though.
@@IlonaCiunaite There is no "I", if one observes, this becomes apparent, but there is a you, this reality IS happening. You ARE suffering. He has decided that the left hemisphere is the ego, and the enemy but it's not that simple.
@@IlonaCiunaiteAddressing your quote that there is no gate, you are already free. We would all like to believe in a higher self, beyond the torturing mind, but the truth is you are the prisoner (yes the prisoner is a ghost), yet you are the prisoner from birth til death. Unfortunately there is no way to escape. That is the human dilemma. The rest is imagination.
I hear you. But how can you escape from imagined prison? Only by seeing that it's imagined and there is no prison to escape. Life continues. The thoughts about needing to escape or trying to find the exit cease. And then everything is OK.
![Identity Shift: Awakening To The Natural State With Angelo Dilullo [Episode #55]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Dh0QeeIm9xo/mqdefault.jpg)
![Identity Shift: Awakening To The Natural State With Angelo Dilullo [Episode #55]](/img/tr.png)
![Everything Changes, Nothing Stays The Same With Tim Cliss [Episode #56]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/V15UA9Y79WE/mqdefault.jpg)
Thank you
✨🙏✨
Wonderful interview 😊🙏🏻❤️
Thank you for your feedback!
One of the best interviews Illona! It is very interesting to see how two people who have seen through the illusion talk to each other.
Thank you kindly!
It's all very real
There is absolutely nothing but unconditional love. Go find it and drown in it
Sweet!
8:44 _"The self is a linguistic trick, it's a trick of language."_
With all due respect to the guest here, this is too simplistic and reductionistic, in my opinion. Sure, there's a linguistic _component_ involved as clearly most of our thoughts revolve around "I-me-mine." But the self illusion goes far deeper than being just a trick of language, or a mere figment of thought. First, I would say that a part of the trickiness is that we tend to want to think of this in terms of a *thing* ("the self"), whereas the phenomenon is more of an activity - a sort of habitual reflexive contraction into an apparent subject experiencing a world of objects. The fact that there is no such subject (nor actual self-existent objects) doesn't mean the illusion of one goes away (or even weakens) just by using language that's not self-oriented, as he seems to suggest here.
This illusion goes deep because it began getting inculcated fairly early in life, and became energetically reinforced in countless ways over many years of normal learning and cognitive development. This is why it seems that the most truly liberating awakenings tend to happen over successive realizations, and tend to be subtractive or deconditioning in nature. It took a lot to build the identity, so it'll probably take a lot of undoing to collapse it. (There might be exceptions to this, of course.)
11:35 _"That illusion, that sense of ownership... if you buy into it... yeah, you'll take better care of your body, you'll take better care of the stuff that you 'own'."_
I'm not so sure about that. Consider the many, many people from all walks of life who take poor care of themselves, even to the point of jeopardizing their health and lifespan, and who also don't particularly care so well for the things they own, and yet these same people have every bit as much a sense of self and doership as anyone else.
33:54 _"The left brain is a storyteller, so it creates the stories, but the right brain is really far more into reality._ [...] _The left brain stories, if they get too out of line with reality, then the right brain steps in, and it steps in and it corrects the left brain."_
Really? I wonder how this conceptualization squares with research showing that it's the _right_ brain that's mostly involved in clinical depression, including distorted thinking patterns and over-fixation on negative emotions. In those cases, the left brain would actually serve the healthy balancing or compensating function he's attributing to the right brain in his example here.
Maybe I'm misreading him, but it just seems like there's a lot of vilifying of the left brain and its analytic thinking role, along with an over-exaltation of the right brain as being totally in touch with reality at all times - almost like there's supposedly a good hemisphere and a bad hemisphere. Another point is that brain lateralization doesn't seem to be as exclusive or absolute as what seems to be getting suggested in this conversation. For example, the overall hemispheric emphasis can differ to some extent based on whether one is right handed or left handed.
All that said, I'm also aware that the guest has a Ph.D. in cognitive neuropsychology, while I most definitely do not. So, take my feedback here with the appropriate grains of salt.
Regarding thinking, which is presented here as a big problem, I wouldn't say the only two possibilities are to either have a quiet mind and no suffering, or to have a busy mind and suffer. Many times an awakening shift happens but does not completely quiet the mind. The mind might get quietER, particularly the self-referential thoughts, but there are still thoughts and thinking. In fact, my observation over the years is that it's rare for even a big realization to result in (or coincide with) the sort of complete quietening of the mind Gary Weber has talked about. Be that as it may, it seems to me the core issue isn't the presence or absence of thoughts, but how and to what extent thoughts are identified with - i.e., invested with the energy of belief combined with a lack of perspective about them and about who or what one is apart from thinking.
Love your comment, thank you for taking time and expressing your point.
Seeing through language is one step, and it is an important step, but as you say, there is more to it. The contraction of “me” needs to be examined experientially and it’s not likely to resolve just by seeing that I is a thought.
Seeing through the story is a good start though.
He's a liar, he is making it up.
What do you mean? Can you elaborate?
@@IlonaCiunaite
There is no "I", if one observes, this becomes apparent, but there is a you, this reality IS happening. You ARE suffering.
He has decided that the left hemisphere is the ego, and the enemy but it's not that simple.
@@IlonaCiunaiteAddressing your quote that there is no gate, you are already free. We would all like to believe in a higher self, beyond the torturing mind, but the truth is you are the prisoner (yes the prisoner is a ghost), yet you are the prisoner from birth til death. Unfortunately there is no way to escape. That is the human dilemma.
The rest is imagination.
I hear you.
But how can you escape from imagined prison? Only by seeing that it's imagined and there is no prison to escape. Life continues. The thoughts about needing to escape or trying to find the exit cease. And then everything is OK.
@@IlonaCiunaite ha ha, if that is how you live, then I bow to you.
Nice Chris! Illona I messaged you on Facebook
Thanks, but i did not find your /message there. Could you send it again?
@@IlonaCiunaite it’s on your personal profile will send now