The surest evidence that all fundamental insight ('awakening', 'realization', 'enlightenment') is ultimately somewhat relative:
It changes depending on what metaphysics you apply to it.
Conversation
Are you timeless consciousness from which your entire life is but a contingently arising waft, like the smell of soup from a bowl?
Or is the entirety of everything you experience a series of contingent arisings, down to and including that consciousness that feels beyond time?
1
3
These are articles of faith. Either position is metaphysically and ontologically loaded, and *unfalsifiable* by current means.
You may as well say God is real (or dead).
Also, they are not the only two possible interpretations.
1
4
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
Replying to
No "seeming" relative in claims that are totally contradictory. That's a red herring.
(Non)continuity of the existence of you after the death of the body is nothing if not a metaphysical claim (under our current understanding of physics, at any rate).
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
Replying to
Yes, so if physics and neuroscience are either at 0 information, misinformation or some hints of discovery...
Buddhists make claims about nothingness and impermanence. Hindus make claims about incarnation and reincarnation. Others make claims of afterlives.
Are they even wrong?