Osaid

Bro. You're the one who isn't taking this seriously. If you were serious, you wouldn't be assuming without any confirmation, and you wouldn't be posting screenshots from a private group on Facebook. You have failed to provide any actual evidence multiple times, and you continuously delegate your own unconfirmed assumption by saying "just research it for yourself, bro." It's fine if you don't jive with the teachings, but there's no need to forsake your epistemic rigor.

It's not dualistic. That's mistaking the map for the territory. Ego is belief in separation, which can be unbelieved and seen to never have been experienced at all. Self-inquiry, meditation, etc, helps to "untie" or "dissolve" the belief. Ultimately leading to a clear perception that there was never time or separation, or any entity which had either quality. There were never dualisms. That's what non-duality tries to get you to see. Like mistaking a rope for a snake your entire life. The snake being analogous to ego/separation.

Lol! "Rupert cheated on his wife" "Proof?" *Shows a private group of a bunch of disgruntled people on Facebook accusing him of spreading nihilism*

Dualism is only profound when you think it's actually pointing to something. Been there, done that. Enjoy your endless intellectual non-existence!

It's "not in an infinite state right now"? So when is it going to be infinite?? Not right now? You keep describing something finite and calling it infinite. Intellect is funny!

Imagination is actual. Right now. Not before or after, those are also right now.

Let me know when you see something that isn't happening right now.

Being in Paris would actually happen now. "Being" always happens now. "I've been in Paris" requires you to not be there, since it talks about the past. "I can go to Paris" requires you to not be there, since it talks about the future. Future and past, aren't ever being. See the vantage points?

This is conflating consciousness with psychedelic experiences. I can't be in the future. I can only be thinking about the future, now. The fundamental point is that you can't be in past and future, therefore the statement isn't pointing to anything that is actually ever occurring. "You" aren't ever in past or future. "You can experience..." never occurs, because it isn't now. It's a concept, never experienced. You can't define yourself through past and future, because you are always happening now. You can only say "I am thinking of the future, now", or "I am thinking of the past, now." The vantage point is always now, without exception.

Experience isn't a multiplicity. There's no such thing as two experiences, three experiences, etc. No one has experienced differences because no one has experienced a different experience. In order to compare "me", you have to define me first. You do that by imagining differences, like chimpanzees. "You" aren't a difference. Differences are imagined. Just because you can conceptualize it doesn't mean it is experienced. There are limitations to thoughts and concepts, which you are unable to see. That is your crux. Addressing dualism is dualism. It's like you want me to address Santa Claus. Chimpanzees don't have consciousness. That is, again, a concept/dualism, which is not experienced.

I wouldn't actually. Perks of non-duality.

Separation. Separation. Separation. Separation. Separation. Dude, you can't have it both ways. On the one hand, you say humans and other entities don't exist. Then you use those very same non-existent entities to measure your "degrees of consciousness." You're non-dual when it suits you, and dual when it suits you.

Pizza awakening is real

This art style actually looks really cool and unique. My favorite so far! Easy winner. Great description.

Very simply, this part is the only "real" one. "Going into illusions" is like "going into unicorns." Hence, all of these are actually part of the mental/intellectual illusion, since it is based on separation, dualisms, and other "unicorns." Understanding unicorns is the belief in unicorns.

Meditation is for watching thoughts appear and disappear, and the natural disillusionment that follows from that. It's about watching your imagination and seeing how it works. Closing eyes removes visual stimuli, so it prevents your mind from latching onto objects in the environment. A pitch black room works even better than just closing eyes IMO, since you can keep them open if you want, it allows more "freedom" in that sense. If there is less stimuli in one direction (sight), focus on another stimuli (thoughts) will be enhanced. In hindsight, if you pay attention, experientially all objects "disappear" if there isn't sufficient light to illuminate them visually. All that is left of "objects", without sight, is just physical touch. This prevents the mind from thinking about external objects, and thus primes it for observation/inquiry. The assumption that it's about "cutting off from the environment" isn't true and probably comes from stereotypes, for the record. It's not about anything you can think of, it's about seeing what thinking of things actually is.

Sharp! What we are seeing here is simply the limits of intellect playing itself out. The "incompleteness" and "desire for higher awakening" is simply the limits of intellect and logic being felt. Non-duality is not some kind of conclusion derived from logic or intellect, it is a perception, in the same way that the color red is not a logical conclusion, it is a perception. The intellect endlessly tries to come up with its own logical and tautological forms of non-duality to compensate, like "solipsism." Osho put it well:

Cool experience. But this would occur now (as everything does), and so it is subject to the implications of that (time and separation are thoughts occurring now, not separate or in time).

It absolutely is. Your intellect will never point to or describe something other than what is occurring right now, because your intellect itself occurs now. It's the classic self-reference problem, which you keep shrugging off.

Non-existence is not true, it is intellectual stagnation. No one experiences non-existence. How could an ideology based on a supposedly non-existent entity (humans), be "true"? That means no one experiences it. If something doesn't exist, no one perceives it. Solipsism is equivalent to the word "non-existence." It is the belief in non-existence. You can't define or describe reality by imagining things that don't exist. Go figure.

What is there to falsify? Humans/others don't exist. Reality exists. You are basically saying: non-existence doesn't exist, and existence exists. Something that doesn't exist says nothing about what exists...because it doesn't exist. There aren't different types of non-existence, that is just your intellect putting fancy labels on non-existence, like "solipsism" and "others." You are just giving non-existence different labels, like "humans", "others", etc. Your intellect is running you in circles. Come back to non-duality please!

Ah ok, got it. Intellect gets tricky with its conclusions, so I wanted to be anal I guess.

There is no such thing as "no experience." This is an intellectual conclusion, like "non-existence." Awareness/consciousness is not something had by people. It is exactly like saying "there are no unicorns in my experience so unicorns have no experience." Who has no experience? Unicorns? Your conclusion is still imaginary. The entire thing is imaginary. Your mind isn't describing anything. You can't describe reality through non-existence. Saying something doesn't exist says nothing about what exists. That is pretty much the crux of "solipsism." It's another intellectual form of non-duality.

It's not simply that imagination is delusion or that it's unreal or something. It's that you can't imagine something that isn't happening right now, and the belief that you can is "delusion." No one ever experiences something that isn't happening now, that is the assumption/delusion/belief which needs to be seen through. When you identify as something you aren't, you aren't actually that identity since that identification is happening now. All is subject to now, even if you think otherwise.

Appearance is now. That's why it is appearing. Now is never "not now", although thoughts can appear as "not now." Example, "yesterday", "tomorrow", "past", "future", etc.