This shows that you don't really understand what I am talking about.

This is the thing- when does unconcious matter become concious, and so create a self or a soul perception? When does an 'It', become a 'who'

The asker,,, who is asking what 2+2 equals?
Who is saying '4' in reply?

excellent article, brings neuroscience and spirituality together.

Ive been in touch with this guy and he sent me a link to one of his lectures on youtube.
Heres the article...
http://www.shaktitechnology.com/enlightenment.htm

And the video...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqrpKUTMXgY

Im really excited about this, I had never heard of neurotheology before, but this type of study allows me to introduce this whole liberation/no self thing to people without having to come across like a spiritual weirdo.
It means I can tell them in a purely scientific way why Ruthless Truth or any other "paths" actually work as a process.

Deepak Chopra ftw

My fav Deepak moment(admittedly i have very few).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qySx8tSs8BQ

This is the only comment I was going to give. Very important.

I didn't read your posts, so my question might have been answered before.
Now we come to the point and recognize there is no 'self'. What do we gain?

At least he knows, he is not enlighted. He knows as much about enlightenment as I do know about brain. Maybe less. While you can learn something about brain when you study books, no one will ever learn anything about enlightenment through studying books. And if someone would live 5000 years and study every book about enlightenment, afterwards he will not know a thing about it.
This is like this: You can learn something about apples when you read books about it. But even if you should read 5000 years long about apple, you will not be able to describe its taste.
What he does is trying to explain enlightenment through brain's processes. This is as if I would try to explain an apple's taste through biological processes.

'When someone eats an apple than he becomes enlighted what an apple is.'
If you understand this sentence, than you will understand how he did go totally wrong.

Hey man, just saw this now, I'll reply back in a while, bit busy now.

kinda hard to explain to be honest, why dont you give it a try and then you'll know!

You get to look at thoughts for what they are, and with that , pointless negative thoughts have no traction, and with that they can only fade over time, so long as you look at them , and work on post liberation, not just presume everything will take care of itself.

You get an insight into how you've been behaving your whole life, and how when you judge others in a certain way, you've most likely been behaving like that at some stage yourself, and as a result, you get to rip it all apart and see what the **** is important in life!

But really, all that is just fancy words that mightnt apply to you if you try to see this.

You see, he's not trying to explain what enlightenment feels like or looks like, hes just knows alot about the brain and is taking a guess at whats happening on a neurological level.

I got in touch with him, it was an interesting conversation!!

Well folks, sorry for dragging up an old thread, dont worry im not here to shout, ive given up on that, I realize its pointless and that people that dont care are actually very content in themselves so dont "need" to care if you get me, i.e. they already have the edge on someone who wants to experience this in terms of their own happiness and confidence.

BUT, I just said Id post a link to a magazine type site im doing. Its a more contemporary approach, I just want to spread it out there for people who DO want to have a look at this whole no-self thing.

If you're lost Id recommened the "Start here" page, and then maybe the FAQ.
www.basiscrunch.com
Cheers

Just in case anyone is interested, the Ruthless Arena (the no-self site that OP learned his stuff from) has been shut down as it appears the site's creator has had a huge breakdown and is quitting "philosophy".

http://ruthlesstruthdotcom.blogspot....11/i-quit.html lol

yea hes a joke, he basically made up all that **** so he could start charging to do what others do for free, some market/business expert called Seth Godin has some lecture/mini book called "The Dip" where he said its ok to quit.

His blogs are cringworthy now, charging £1k for what is free plenty of other places.

Wow. I've always considered myself something of a nerd but I've never thought so hard I began internally bleeding.

'It makes me sick just thinking about it'

Guess he couldn't ignore his self after all

(it's not easy not being you)

His latest posts are seriously cringy, like a bad salesman. Real shame, but **** it, that doesn't change what I've been arguing about in this thread though ( I just realized 'theres no need to shout' thats all lol)

Hey, an archive of the site that spawned all this is back up for 12 hours: www.ruthlesstruth.com/arena

(presented by truthstrike.com)

That one is not existing is a misunderstood eastern religious/philosophical view that has some bases on the area of meditation and changing the mind, emotions, or the body, e.g. the myth says I can't say I am fat when I am fat; really stupid really, as I truly am fat if I am fat, it just saying that I could also be non-fat, but how stupid one needs to be to not see that and need some absurd self denial vision to lead him to the direction of seeing that? I am not fat but that's not the point as I am not identified to me not being fat but I consider that I am also fat because I don't exist (bravo!).

To say one isn't existing is most idiotic as anyone can see we exist and it can be put in parts as body and mind, the structure and the memory, the genes, talents, likings, opinions, amount of anger, love, well being, health, sickness, everything, the feeling of me and all. The one who says we do not exist is a religious freak who is blinded by some wrong idea and that's all; just keep hitting him in the head for a couple of hours and he will wake up to the reality.

I'd like to ask OP as to why he likes to call it 'spiritual enlightenment' rather than 'intellectual enlightenment'?

Saw this on a blog today, synched well with the bump. From 'Reflections on Being'.