Preetom

I think that's a great question. As Truth itself is incommunicable, we have different levels of understanding in the realm of communication. Just like you can explain the theory of sex one way to a child and another way to a virgin adult. The adult version would definitely be more 'evolved' and seemingly 'closer' to the actual thing. But the irony is, both the child and the virgin adult haven't experienced it, so it still is just a concept. That's why intellectual questions are answered based on the level of question. No Truth is ever communicated anyway. The purpose becomes helping the questioner at his own level and satisfying his urge to know stuff. You can still play around with all the concepts, as long as it is not turned into a dogma. As Leo mentioned in the last video that he loves nitpicking models and concepts. He wouldn't know what else to do other than this. It certainly provides a sense of intellectual security, a kind of refined Eudaimonic pleasure; undoubtedly far greater than some other gross hedonic pleasures and search for a false security.

The mind hears this and formulates an idea how it will go dumb and mute zombie after enlightenment for the rest of it's life. Who needs april fool when you got a companion like this right?

This answer reminds me one of Ramana's himself. Q: What is wisdom-insight? A: Remaining quiet is what is called wisdom-insight

Just finished this video. Also watched another video where DH himself breaking it down (tube experiment). It leads to the exact same recognition as self-inquiry! A non-located presence of being that is simultaneously no-thing and pervades everything without identification with anything particular This is where I come back to(and fall out of) several times a day through doing self-inquiry. It's getting easier. Thanks again for sharing it. I'll check out Richard Lang's Headless experiment series on Youtube later

Thanks for the link! I'll definitely check it out. I've seen DH mentioned a few times in this forum but didn't really looked into his method. For me, I'm really grateful towards Rupert Spira for bringing all this home at an intellectual level very satisfactorily. So I kind of exhausted my superficial search for more content and now just get back to the most potent resources(books, videos etc) that feel right for me over and over again. It's basically self-inquiry, do or die for me now haha.. And about mystical experiences, 'something' does stick. It's not just the fireworks that pass away. I feel the wisdom-discrimination(neti neti) growing as time passes. All the best with your journey. Just keep your 'head' up. Remember, it usually hits when you least expect it And I'll reply back once I finish that video

you actually give some very good points. I've yet to see an open-minded person who got heavily indoctrinated into religion. These people either stay in their religions all their lives blindly, or they rebel and become close-minded materialist atheists (or some combo of both) And most of the so called 'holy' books were written a lot later after the original prophets by clergies(who were also politicians and king's men) in order to establish their political propaganda. Those 'holy' books were developed as the means to control the masses.

oh boy...that sure was one rude awakening huh..

However you wanna interpret it, is up to you. But Papaji himself taught advaita vedanta, the direct path of jnana yoga for self-realization. A number of his students are now recognized spiritual teachers themselves in the west (mooji, gangaji etc)

The 'place' which you aren't willing to name, hindus named it as Brahman. That's it.

More like difference between Emanyalpsid and Preetom Hasn't this been the case down the ages?

Some people may have allergic reaction to that word *coughs*

Religions are good for building morality, discipline, selflessness and other divine human virtues. They can be a great method for preparing the ground. But one must not fall into the trap of dogma and ideologies and be open to leave the 'religion' in it's traditional sense when it's utility is exhausted. From that prepared ground, independent open-minded inquiry can lead to Truth/God realization very quickly (example: Papaji. He was a serious devotee of lord Krishna. He would chant the lord's divine name from 2:30 am to 9:30 am everyday before going to work for decades. He eventually grew out of it, went to Ramana Maharshi, followed the direct path of inquiry and got Enlightened very soon as he had a prepared, pure, sattvic body-mind)

Then dependent arising itself becomes it's own ground What is there prior to making a distinction and thus having dependent arising? If there is 'nothing' prior to distinctions, then what are you making distinctions of? But the truth doesn't show up as it was conceived beforehand, aye? Again you are conflating theoretical background developed for teaching purposes and how the methodologies actually work. You don't search for 'something' and reach to Truth. Like I said, enlightenment itself is realized as non-existent and that is Enlightenment(paradoxical). Not 'something', not 'nothing'. What remains?

Thanks!

Let's call it vegetable curry and start the fight all over again!

exactly! When Hindus talk about Brahmanic Consciousness, they don't refer to this human consciousness that fluctuates day to day. So clearly, let's not talk about something we have no experience of. So this 'mind' is the unchanging ground for this absolute relativity? If that is the case, then I'm pretty sure hindus call this 'mind'/'reality' as Brahman. Ta da! 1) Now if you say that this 'mind' itself is subject to dependent arising or causality, then your argument becomes incoherent. How can you distinguish a 'mind' in which causality is happening, when that 'mind' itself is subject to dependent arising? Then there cannot be a 'mind' as opposed to dependent arising; only dependent arising rests on it's own ground. 2) Or you might claim that dependent arising is only mentioned because we are trying to think and conceptualize stuff here. Well, hindus say the same thing! Without referring to a thought or concept, there is no universe/space/time/causality. But there is 'something' that must alone exist. That 'something' is Brahman/Buddha mind/Absolute. It all comes back to the soup. There was always only the Soup from the get go~

Sorry I may haven't understood your question before. Yes. Enlightenment must answer this question. If Enlightenment means knowing who you are without a shadow of a doubt, then there is a finality to it. It is in one sense the end of a search. But that doesn't mean life and growth is over. Life still goes on, on it's multifarious levels; from the level of thoughts, to the level of gross, physical world, any way you want to conceptualize. But a fundamental finality is realized as well. That's why language breaks here trying to explain post-enlightenment. So you are basically saying that Causality is Absolute Truth? How do you 'know' that Consciousness cannot stand on it's own ground? You can't refer to a thought or scripture. It's only Consciousness that knows. Thoughts and scriptures cannot know. They are known.

I found a Buddha quote(hope it's his ), which I think is so critical for serious open minded inquiry, how the ruthless observation and dis-identification should go on. ''The very idea of existence implies a dwelling place, therefore its clinging. Both 'is' and 'is not' are a dualism that has no room in true mind (subtle consciousness, the mind without beginning) " - The Buddha It is basically the same instruction of how true neti neti(self-inquiry) should go on(which is an vedanta technique). It's just that hindus form a metaphysical absolute background called Brahman(or pure existence) for the purpose of teaching but Buddhists don't make such an assumption. Yes Brahman is an assumption, the same way 'Nirvana' is also an assumption. But they must inevitably reach to the same placeless place.

Do you see that how you are comfortably avoiding the 'knowing' aspect over and over again? How can you make any legitimate claim without 'knowing' it? You might say that 'knowing' can't stand on itself without an object to know, as everything is dependent. But then again, the question arises how do you 'know' that? We are back again at square one.

@Serotoninluv Recently Leo talked about the distinction between States(a phychedelic/meditative high) and Stages(permanent transformation that actually sticks). Would you say that your dmt breakthrough took you to the next stage? Or are you still trying to make sense of and integrate those states?

I'm actually in the process of intense self-inquiry. I've studied things intellectually, had several glimpses here and there. If I have to mention my 1st significant glimpse, it was during self-inquiry. I planned a 7 day, 12 hours a day, self-inquiry home retreat last year. I got WOKE big time on 3rd day and the rest of retreat collapsed lol. It's impossible to communicate that 'experience'. All the mind can remember is that ''it felt extraordinarily good!'', but that's just the body-mind's side effect reaction to Truth and actually got nothing to do with Truth. I am from a theistic family where I was taught to worship hindu deities from childhood. In my teenage years, I grew out of it and started reading Bhagavad Gita (2 pages everyday for like 3 years). But I translated that text as some sort of elite superhuman 'moralism' due my limited understanding and completely missed the essence of that text which is non-duality and liberation. Then around 5 years ago, I came across Eckhart Tolle's Power of Now and that was the beginning. Up to this point, I studied several books, teachings, teachers and techniques. It all served it's purpose in the sense that, now I have absolutely no doubt that Truth exists and the method I chose(self-inquiry) is a valid way to crack this nut. Now it's only matter of time and events(If I'm permitted to say so ) before the deal is sealed once and for all. Wish me luck

''I am that complete which prevails everywhere...complete in itself I, Shiva; the deity of eternal bliss I am Joy itself…I am Bliss itself I bow down to lord Shiva I AM SHIVA, I AM PURE CONSCIOUSNESS EVERLASTING, EVER PURE , ENLIGHTENED. I AM FREE I AM BLISSFUL CONSCIOUSNESS PRESENT IN ALL FORMS AND WITHOUT FORM. I AM WITHOUT A DUAL FORM. I AM THE SELF , SUPREME CONSCIOUSNESS. I AM CONSCIOUSNESS TRUE AND PURE.........'' What a beautiful prayer!

@Freyah Actually all religions and philosophical systems have large books. Yes it's one of the most pernicious traps of taking the map for territory. Understand one thing. Truth cannot be communicated. That's just the nature of this work. So you can't conflate 'truths' from other areas of life with this 'Truth'. You can, but that would be a trap. All the religious instructions and intellectual discussions have only one purpose: to give you a relatively satisfactory ground from which you can begin the search. Now if you need some quantum mechanics theory to satisfy your intellectual needs, then go there. If it's the Buddhist texts, then go there. But remember the purpose. None of that can hand you the Truth. They can only convince you to begin your own search. If this is your attitude, then all spiritual texts or scientific research can help you in one way or another. The moment you take it as ideology, it's game over before the game even starting I guess this is why the greatest masters always answered according to the level of questioner. As Truth is incommunicable, the masters provided the answers to help, not to hand over Truth. But unfortunately, their messages were inevitably turned in ideologies

So are there parts of universe or reality which do not conform to dependent arising?