Saumaya

Im saying they only have pointers, not actual Non Duality. Traditions can only express Non duality or give some sort of a pointer. True Non duality is practised and includes the work done on oneself.

lol, my point just not disagree with him because you dont like him. Misunderstanding him is not the issue

Non duality can only be expressed in form of pointers. True Non Duality is to be practised. Layers of Self are removed till No Self remains. I did study Zen and Advaita Vedanta long ago, but I dont have any interest in them any longer.

Was that so hard

Not every teaching needs to be enlightenment. If I say be more considerate about other peoples feelings, I shouldn't use it because its not about enlightenment? Non Duality has nothing to with traditions. Traditions may attempt to express it but true Non duality is always practised.

Does everything needs to be about enlightenment? So what You say it like without traditions, there is no Non Duality

Fine, Ive made my point. It seems like you are not going to admit what you have done.

Im not concerned with Marcus's words, Im concerned with Faceless's words. Those are the one which you disagreed with without actually trying to understand them when you actually meant the same thing.

If I understand Faceless correctly, he meant Teaching has to be contemplated otherwise it cannot be realised. A teacher can teach a teaching, but self knowledge is only gained when the teaching is realised. He doesnt say there should be no teaching, he says there should be no psychological authority. Any teaching is still a teaching. Vedanta is not a special snowflake.

Thats what I am saying. Faceless says Self knowledge/wisdom cannot be taught. This is something that must be explored in oneself, without any form of personal or collective authority. If one is pointing to that as a necessity that is a great sharing indeed. Anna disagrees Self-knowledge is exactly what Advaita Vedanta teachers teach. You don't know what youre talking about and I say that as respectfully as possible. Anna agrees and says the same thing Obviously the teaching has to be understood and contemplated.

This is sad to hear something like this from you You dont own this forum. I can say whatever I want in any discussion. My point is to consider whatever Faceless has to say before randomly disagreeing with him. You said the same thing as he did but you still disagreed with him.

Thats what Faceless said. I dont think you should disagree with faceless just for the sake of disagreeing.

Mugging up bunch of spiritual concepts is not Self Knowledge

@Jed Vassallo I think its called self improvement forum, not Leo forum

No

Wait I know... you are some kind of....desert plant???

Ok? So if I murder someone with positive energy, maybe thinking they will go to God quicker, it makes me untouchable by criticism? Ofcourse its not about right or wrong My Bad

Im in the fifth dimension, apparently you can walk through walls and make a girl squirt without touching her.

No Self means God is only left. There is no deeper realisation. If there is further to go, then your living experience is not of Permanent No Self. There is a difference between getting a glimpse of No Self and completely transcending the ego. This includes realising limitless nature of consciousness.

Man you dont get tired of defending your spiritual ego. Fine I wont criticize you anymore

Thats the most retarded thing i have ever heard

Still proving my point. Mugging up spiritual concepts and not truly realising them. And how am i exactly brainwashed sir?

This pretty much confirms my point.

It seems like you have mug up some spiritual pointers mixed them up in a wrong way. Why do you feel a need to constantly say time doesn't exist when the context doesn't require it God is consciousness, I dont know what you mean by We are God.