who chit

Yep. A circle jerk of resistance.

Resistance is a reaction to "protect". Who or what, is it that is being protected? As Preetom stated, who is doing the resisting/protecting? Is that which is being protected a construction of the mind? A predetermined conditioned belief or conclusion constructed in the mind/memory,not in line with the fact or actuality of what is present? If the fact of the moment is that there is a feeling of resistance,can you acknowledge that there is a feeling of resistance and allow it completely without any movement to do anything about it. This would be resisting resistance. The wanting to let go of resistance is because of the dislike of the feeling being created by resisting. If there is no judgement of the feeling,ie., good/bad,like/dislike etc.,one can allow what is, to be as it is. When there is allowance of what is to be as it is,there is freedom from the unnecessary creation of what is not or what is false, that perpetuates suffering.

@cetus56 No problem. Those Archons can be a bit crafty.

They're in need of soldiers. They're at war with the Fucktardians for control of Colonel Sanders much sought after secret,fried chicken recipe. It's considered to be of great value among the Galactic Confederation of Planets.

Not much different from L.Ron Hubbard and his theory of Thetans, the "Galactic Confederacy",and some quack named Xenu who dropped his own people into a volcano and then blew them up with hydrogen bombs for good measure.

Thought creates experience and the "I" that experiences that experience. If there is the experience of feeling hopeless,thought creates both the feeling of being hopeless and the "I" that says/feels "I'm hopeless". Not to speak for @Faceless but my interpretation of what he's saying, is freedom is being free/unattached from the psychological content which creates and experiences feelings of hope and/or hopelessness. What creates the feelings of hope and/or hopelessness is psychological content. Hope is thought imagining a future in which it will no longer feel it's created feeling of hopelessness. It's psychological content seeking to escape it's own created suffering from it's interpretation of a situation,rather than accepting the fact of the moment. If the fact is "I'm stuck" there is acknowledgement and acceptance of the fact and it ends there. Thoughts of despair,and never ending hopelessness is psychological content/I thought adding suffering/unreality to the fact of what simply is. Hopelessly in love would be choiceless love. Love is the fact without it being a choice. It just is.

This video is about an older man that shares his life story with his grandson. The older man had lost his wife and as he was looking through the picture album, his head filled with memories of his beloved wife. The color image represented that no matter what, she is always with him. "Every day is a new day".

Non Duality is freedom from this vs that,what should or should not be,"me" vs "other", past vs future. It is freedom from resistance to what is. It is freedom from psychological suffering,born from attachment to what is not true (conditioned belief and false sense of self). It is realizing your true nature as eternal,everlasting,and ever alive. It is realizing that your original essence is nondual,all inclusive,free of dualistic conflict created by psychological suffering. It is peace,joy,deep inner silence,unperturbed by the illusory nature of an implicit dualistic world, created and interpreted by a false identification, with/through, an attachment to the body/senses, and the conditioned thoughts,beliefs,concepts,imaginations and ideas of the mind,as being "me" or "my true self (I)". Whereas the true "I" is unconditioned,unattached,everlasting and free from the conflicts and suffering of the individual's created,dualistic persona in which they falsely believe to be "I"/"me".

It doesn't make sense to the not-you that's trying to understand it. To the one that is,it's an indisputable fact.

You just might be onto something there Feel Good.

Good distinction. And I fully agree it's futile to philosophize about it. I just found Wilber's model offered an interesting perspective on the Turiyatita discussion. I honestly hadn't heard of it before until @cetus56 mentioned it,loll.

In reference to what is considered nonduallity or final liberation: Natural Enlightenment: In some contexts, enlightenment is used strictly to mean Sahaj Samadhi or ever present self-liberating awareness. This is what we call liberation. It moves beyond simple transcendent witnessing, to include every state imaginable, including a complete loss of witnessing and identifying as the contracted separate self-sense. This is what Zen calls Ordinary Mind. Awareness, just as it is, is the great perfection. There is "just this".

This falls in line with what is said here about Turiyatita being a "state" which comes and go's, and not permanent liberation, as it is dependent upon not being drawn back into the "i am". "Complete Union: Enlightenment has been used to refer to the state of complete union or Turiyatita. The recognition that the Self (Witness) is the Self of the entire universe. This temporary state is also described as the recognition of emptiness as form. (Adding to the confusion among scholars, this state is often accompanied by a simultaneous recognition of liberation, natural enlightenment.the state of complete union is temporary and the final liberation of Natural Enlightenment is permanent because it is ever-present and always available . Liberations in consciousness, unlike states, are not temporary. Once realized, each liberation creates a permanent shift in awareness. Final liberation is not to be confused with the blissful state experience of Complete Union (Turiyatita). Turiyatita, also called One Taste, is a temporary state that comes and goes. Final Liberation is a permanent recognition; ever-present and impossible to avoid.

Interesting thing about awakening,prior to it, I had never read a religious scripture,esoteric writing or philosophy text in my life. Mostly because it didn't make much since and I assumed most,if not all of it,to be written based on myth and philosophy. After awakening I started looking into some of these writings and texts and, surprisingly, found I could understand the bulk of what was being said. From the eastern writings like the vedas, upanishads, baghavad gita, tao te ching, etc.,- to the christian mystics,NT bible,western esoteric writings etc., I haven't looked at the Quran,but from these writings and text's I have looked into, they all carry very similar messages about the "Reality" or "God." The reason,and what can only be the reason, imo, is the ones who wrote or delivered those words in spoken and written form were speaking from an awakened and/or realized state. Not some made up philosophy or religion,which they were later turned into. Undoubtedly there is also the mix of myth and metaphor as well, depending on the culture in which they were written,but the central messages and themes are very similar across the board in reference to God or Reality.

By Acharya Prashant: Nisargadatta Maharaj says to be constantly in the “I am” realization. What does that mean? What is this “I am” realization? He used to say never forget “I am”. What does that mean? It means two things, of which one is nothing. We will first discuss the thing. There is this entire world and its happenings, and seemingly you at the centre of this world. And there are events that are happening all the time: thoughts, discussions, accidents, destiny, love, hate, anger, profit, loss, news, knowledge; all that is happening all the time. And the mind is kept active, busy with all that. To remember “I am” means to remember that none of that, which is happening, really has an objective existence. So whatever is happening is ‘you’. If you find it difficult to digest initially that if there is a war happening in the Middle East, how could this war be me? Then start off by at least remembering that whatever is happening has been given a color by you. At least this much can be remembered. So, you can remember I am the one who is giving it a meaning. I am the one who is giving it an interpretation, a color. Slowly from there when you realize the depth of your interpretation, when you realize that the painting is nothing except the colors and all colors are been given by you. Then you come down to saying that, “I am that event”. You start off by saying that, “I am the interpreter of the event”. And when you see how deep your interpretations are, that there is nothing really left if you take away the interpretations; then you actually say that, “I am that event”. This is the first level of remembering “I am”. Whatever is happening, whatever I am seeing is not outside of me; “I am its seer”, “I am its projector”, “I am its creator” and “I am its interpreter”. In fact, “I am it”. This is the first level of meaning. What is the second level? I had said that the second level is a nothing level. The second level means that I am nothing except the events that are happening. Now, you cannot think about this second level. This second level, if you see is just a remainder. It is just that which remains after everything else has gone. The mantra that Nisargadatta is giving is essentially only this much. Do not take the world as different from yourself, see yourself in every happening. See that the happening cannot mean anything to you except if you give it a meaning. See that the world does not trouble you; you attach troublesome meanings to the world. This is the first meaning of “I am”. And when you can clearly see that you are the world and the world is you, and then your conception of yourself holds no ground. You cannot possibly say that I am this entire existence. If you say you are this entire existence, then again you are saying this same thing, “I am nothing”. Because then you are boundary less. Or you could ask a question this way, “Can the world appear to me as it appears to me without me being what I am? So does the world have any objective existence? Can the world appear to me as it appears to me without me being what I am? So, is the world really separate from me? Or if something happens to me; could this have happened to me, had I not been what I am? Could this have happened to somebody else? No, it is happened only to me. And if it is happening only to me, it surely has something to do with what I am?” A woman is crying and walking away from a crowd of ten men. Only one is especially disturbed, the other nine are not. Could this one man have been disturbed, had he not been the husband of this woman? These nine men are not bothering right now. Would they have not bothered, had they been the husband of this woman? So, look at the happening and see yourself in the happening. The more you look at yourself in the happening, the more the distance between you and the world, the more the separation gets dissolved. When the separation gets dissolved, the happening loses meaning. And then your definition of yourself loses meaning and there is just clarity. A pure clarity which you can call as an empty clarity. This empty clarity is the real “I am”. The things that mean so much to you today, could they have meant so much, had the course of your life been different? There are things that matter so much to you today. Could they have mattered, had the accidents in your life been different? So, that which you start taking as very important, as essential, when you remember that it is not essential, its significance is supplied to it by ‘me’. Then it starts losing its significance.

What if the thoughts are just conditioning playing itself out,of which,without your involvement in them, would cease to cause uneasiness and distress? Without those thoughts,would you still exist? Whether there are thoughts or no thoughts,do you cease to exist? Do you cease to be you? If you were to stop identifying with those thoughts and believing they are true,who or what would you be? Who or what are you without those thoughts?

@Faceless To you as well. ?

Not such a bad thing to be headless. ?

Yes indeed. ?

This is the movement of thought/self desiring to understand,what it can't and will never be able to understand. Attempting to understand feeds the thought-self loop further into the hole.

Yes. It will try to conceive/imagine what it is,or might be ,to be"god" in order to perpetuate it's false existence. A movement of seeking security in it's own conception.

What is, doesn't have to identify as being what is. What is,already is,without having to become. Thought-self cannot be what is,because it has to make a movement to try to be what is. What is,is prior to thought/self/time/memory experience.In holistic observation, what is,see's this movement (holistic observation) of thought self trying to "become" (to experience), and in that seeing,the accumulated conditioning of thought/self/time/memory/experience dissolves. What is,is pure / free,of any/all accumulated psychological conditioning of "i"thought/mind/memory/experience. Pure being in and of itself,free of psychological accumulation. Pureness of Being,is what is. There is no becoming.

Thanks for the unconditioned observation friend. ?.

Exactly what I was aiming for. Thanks @dorg ?.

See that what one calls himself/herself as... "I" "me" "myself" ("I"-"me"-"self') is a concept,a thought. Of which is given it's reality by ones conditioned belief of themselves being an individual,personal I-self. The individual,personal "I-self",is only a collection of ideas,beliefs,memories,experiences and thoughts(i.e., the accumulation of memory/time) , that make up ones conditioning,which one then self concludes and reinforces again and again over time, to be "me" or "I" /"my personal self". This mis-identification with the "I" concept/idea/thought,and it's interconnection and intermingling with all the other conditioning of the mind/thoughts (i.e.,the accumulation of ideas,beliefs/experience/time/memory) , gives the illusion that "I am the mind/thoughts" and/or 'I am the I-thought/concept/mind / conditioning" (i.e.,the accumulation of experience/time/memory) . Since the personal "I"/self ,is a conceived thought/idea,and not a real entity, then any psychological movement of thought/fear/desire,to seek security from what is,is the very same movement of that conceived of I-thought concept, seeking security in itself,which is thought. Thus you have only a thought/idea,believed to be a real entity (the "I"/"me"),which is the accumulation of conditioned experience/time/memory ,seeking security in itself (a thought). Realize that what is "you, is not the accumulated thoughts,ideas,concepts/beliefs,likes/dislikes,experiences (i.e.,memory/time) of the mind and/or body. To be free, is to be free of the accumulation of the "I"thought/mind/memory/time/experience(all one). Then the unitary psychological movement of "i-me -self-/"thought/"fear" as one whole movement, will cease. Wholeness and/or Fullness in Emptiness.