ground

There is no contradiction between discipline and freedom. Why? Because you can freely decide to apply discipline or not. One who knows freedom knows when discipline is advisable and conducive.

What you call 'unquestioned assumption' is the manifestation of delusion. It is actually not a conceptual/intellectual assumption in the first place but a sentiment/intuition that is inherent in sense perception as such. On top of that intuitive delusion there may then arise conceptual/intellectual assumptions or even assertions. So if sense perception is missing, like in conventional 'imagination', it may feel as if 'less real'. But both, sense perception and imagination, are equally empty of truth.

'Mind' can be understood to be 'ordinary mind' or 'mind-as-such'. 'Ordinary mind' is common mind or deluded mind that is guided by conceptuality and feelings/emotions. 'Mind-as-such' is the essence of 'ordinary mind', is 'ordinary mind' emptied of conceptuality and feelings/emotions and delusion, 'Ordinary mind' is like a veil concealing the fundamental nature of 'mind-as-such'. One may also say: 'Mind-as-such' is the gap between thoughts. Awareness as it is understood in the context of enlightenement is an awareness that knows itself. This awareness is beyond time and location and is a feature of 'mind-as-such'. To 'transcend mind' means to transcend 'ordinary mind' and means to be introduced to the nature of 'mind-as-such'. Having been introduced to the nature of 'mind-as-such' awareness lightens up.

The issue here is fear, not death. Negating death won't help as negating 'I' won't help. The conditional circumstances of human beings are such that since the thoughts 'I', 'my', 'mine' appear unceasingly the thought of death appears unceasingly. Continuously one faces news of people having died and is reminded of one's own impermanence. And death may happen in any moment. One cannot know when it will happen. Some lucky people do not know fear of death and some are fearful but can live with it. Some however are very fearful of death and suffer. So how to get rid of this fear if one belongs to those plagued by fear of death? All religions are offering their own specific beliefs to deal with it. One can have a try. One can also try psychotherapeutic treatment if the fear causes suffering or gets overwhelming from time to time. Or one may try practices that change one's view of 'I', life and death without negating these. This however is different from religion only if the change of view is sustainable and based on imperturbable certainty.

"Before surrendering anything it's better to realize it as that what it is. Why? Because then 'surrender vs not surrender' may become irrelevant." means the intention to surrender is based on the misconception of true existence and if this misconception is removed through realizing it as such the intention collapses and 'surrender vs not surrender' becomes irrelevant.

you can't trust your instinct and if you were enlightened you wouldn't have posted what you've posted. Before surrendering anything it's better to realize it as that what it is. Why? Because then 'surrender vs not surrender' may become irrelevant.

But you can say this only when affirming what has been negated before.

@Hardik jain Usually it is thus: a teacher gives you precise instruction how to meditate and alerts you to the possible faults and hindrances and when you experience difficulties you consult your teacher.

Time is like 'I' and location in space: although not inherently existing it will never go away as long as there is conscious being, you may meditate interminably, still 'I', location in space and time will unceasingly appear.

Compassion is wishing others be free from suffering or trouble. Love is wishing others may have happiness. Of course love is more commonly known as erotic love which may be platonic or desirous.

People tend to understand 'the ego' as real because psychology and psychoanalysis make a big fuss about an alleged 'ego'. But since there never has been an 'ego' and never will be an 'ego' giving advice like “it’s the ego” is similar to saying “it’s space”. Where should people look to find 'ego' if they're told “it’s the ego” ? They do not have any chance to see the root of their issues. Look into space, Can you see the root? So what to do? you have to pick people up where they are and give advice only if they are asking for it. If they are asking for advice and If they believe 'I', 'me', 'mine' too be true then why should one try to persuade them of their truthlessness? Instead cherish the 'I', flatter the 'I' and motivate the 'I' to do what is conducive. Activities and effort are necessary for every 'I'.

you may not agree and you can simply ignore what I say but wanting this (alleged 'non-duality') and rejecting that (alleged 'under current of emotional shit') is the issue here.

As far as I understand 'do nothing' implies that one does neither follow/attend to thoughts nor try to suppress them. In that way thoughts usually subside naturally so 'thoughts going wild' appeared a bit strange to me.

Although meditation is recommended in many teachings one should not get obsessed about meditation. Meditation is not a necessary cause or prerequisite for anything. It is just that meditation may be helpful depending on circumstances, but notice 'may' not necessarily 'is'. Meditation can also be harmful depending on one's own situation and depending on the teaching one follows. There are even teachings that recommend to avoid meditation. What did strike me was your 'do nothing' technique you described with 'I will do nothing and let thoughts take over' and I wondered what 'let thoughts take over' actually should mean.

I don't think one should mix up different techniques. Awareness of breath is one and labeling mindfulness is another and non-conceptual awareness is still another. It really depends what system of thought / teaching you are following. Usually different system of thought / teachings recommend different techniques. Following a given system one should stick to its techniques.

Both, something and nothing are mere habits of thinking in extremes. Actuality is in between. Seeking explanations is cultivating the habits of thinking in extremes. In terms of liberation it is better to overcome these habits.

No that's just negative thoughts or feelings. No issue. If you don't impute truth to anything, i.e. if you do not affirm anything that appears, then negative thoughts or feelings don't arise. Affirmation or imputation of truth is just a mental factor. This factor can be extinguished.If you can identify this factor and extinguish it then you know. Acceptance is not appropriate in the context of liberation. Someone who pursues liberation trains in overcoming both, acceptance and rejection. Someone who does not pursue liberation may take a different approach.

The pleasure of a steak is enlightenment.

Thanks for your understanding.

@SoonHei you may produce millions of different verbal expressions trying to get at 'it'. Still you won't succeed because all there is is conceptual fabrication without which there still would be intuitive fabrication and thus you.

In this thread you claimed to have attained nirvana. your attachment to buddhism however does not correspond with your claim.

Don't worry if you have attained such 'knowing' you're still deeply involved in ordinary world.

I am saying this and Leo is saying that. A third may say still something else. Who cares about who is saying what? And why? Krishna=cheeseburger non-cheesy=cheesy So if cheeseburger is cheesy then in non-cheesy cheeseburger is Krishna

That is certainly not the case. your posts have shown that you are still attached to conceptuality.

Wow. i guess you, Mu_ and Emanyalpsid are totally on a wrong path. Why can't you let go?