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
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
Replying to
Yes, I'm more interested in the entailments than the core.
Descartes realizes cogito ergo sum. (Can be shortened to "sum" and achieve the same point, but I digress.)
Then he goes out and tries to construct an entire metaphysics. It seems to me like these are not equally true.
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
Replying to
Similar attitude. I will experimentally believe things and instrumentally believe things, but I am very agnostic about most anything, fundamentally.
Which is not to say I never buy into anything...
In the same sense I would say realizing nirvana or advaita or moksha or whatever else can be realized, whether they're different or equal...
It gives you an insight that may be utterly reconfigurative of your relationship with experience itself. But it's not a universal proof.