Water by the River

Considering all this thinking ones way to the Absolute... This Mormon choir does it at least in style. While staying with decent, humble, sane and likeable egos. Not blowing it up to coscmic proportions. At the moment of Death My strength if from heaven And what is even stranger: Besides some mods stating something like "take it slowly" there is zero comment from higher up on: "Enlightenment is just a reinterpretation" instead of Awakening and actual awakened states. With a questionable effect on the general spiritual flight level of this forum. Selling Water by the River

Enlightenment It is not just a reinterpretation or recontextualization. It tends to stabilize awakened states in daily life. Change of brainwaves for example: Good luck doing that with reinterpretation or recontextulization. Or "thinking" ones way to Enlightenment, blowing up the Ego to cosmic proportions. I mean Leo clearly says Awakening is a state change, an awakening, and not just recontextualisation or reinterpretation. Nonduality is clearly an awakened state and not just mental reinterpretation or recontextualization. Water by the River

Very true. Mayas legions. Well known in Vajrayana practice. And good luck seeing these dark forces as something merely appearing in oneself, when one is barely able to keep mindfulness in daily life... "Who are YOU in this vast multiverse, Mr. Strange?" That whole movie was inspired by the trips of the writers, especially this scene. Hic Sunt Dracones. That can eat an uprepared trippers mental sanity for breakfast. But Razard has already proposed watching Horror-movies with hard psychedelics, just for the fun of it. When asked by Breakingthewall which kind of stuff he tripped with not much came back... Selling Water by the River

Because "Your Consciousness" is in reality totally empty and impersonal. With just some Illusions arisings of I/me arise and float/move in it. It seems that "you" are these I-feelinsg/I-thoughts, but these are just objects moving in you. Temporarily. You can fully well "be there", the world arising in you, but no person/ego anywhere to be found. Just perceptions perceiving themselves. THAT Impersonal Consciousness is the same as Leos, or "mine", or "anybodys". That is not just theory, but the direct understanding/apprehension in certain awakened states. And that only works because it is fully Impersonal, which is another word for fully empty. NOTHING, but aware. Because if it would not be literally Pure Empty Awareness, it doesn't fit into the mindstream of "another" being. How would the feeling/thinking of being you, OBEler, "fit" into somebody else? It wouldn't. And that is why the full impersonal or fully empty part of Impersonal Consciousness is so important: As long as it is not impersonal and fully empty, one can never understand what another is. Or oneself. And IT is also literally the essence of all appearance of the World. World=Consciousness. That is clear in nondual states, when there are not two, but one nondual infinite field WITHOUT any subject splitting this Infinite Field of Reality into two. And if "you" don't see Leos point of view, the perspective of Infinite Consciousness that is the sentient being/perspective of Leo perceiving other perceptions..... And all perspectives/beings/Nodes in Indras Net Mirror reflect each other: Or the picture of Leos Infinity of Gods video is also Indras Net. Selling Water by the River

Yes, much better than Absolute Solipsism. How about Ken Wilbers description/perspective? Every "thing/being" actually is a perspective (of Infinite Consciousness), a Holon. A crystal node in Indras Net, reflecting and reacting on all other Nodes. Indras Net is a very common Psychedelic Experience, so its not just theory. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indra's_net And now the cruical point: Everything, from Human, Animal, Plant, Molecule, Atom can be considered as perspective/holon imagined and held in Gods/Absolute Reality/Infinite Consciousness/ seemlingly "spliced" up Infinite Mind divided into infinite sub-perspectives. And using perspective as fundamental building block of the Lila (imagined of course), one never has to leave the Mind-Only thinking/school (Yogachara school of Mind Only Doctrine of Buddhism for example). All is Infinite Mind/Infinite Impersonal Consciousness/Suchness/Nothingness. Then, its actually quite easy to explain what happens with actualized.org, or your Laptop, or anything else when "you" leave the room and don't perceive it anymore: It continues as perspectives/Holons (Molecules and so on) in Indras Great Net, the sum total of the manifested side of Infinite Consciousness. Not as matter, but as perspectives/Holons held in Indras Net. And Indras Net is nothing else then Infinite Consciousness spliced into infinite perspectives. Same holds of course for other beings like humans. No need to say "you don't exist when I don't perceive you", which is madness anyway. And every Holon contains other sub-holons, a human contains organs, cells, molecules, atoms. Each being perspectives/Holons/perspectives reflecting and reacting on other Holons/perspectives. That solves the remaining problems of Solipsism easily, although its then no longer Solipsism, but True Nonduality. Infinite Consciousness splitting itself up into the Infinite Perspectives of Indras Net of Holons/perspectives of consciousness. The sum total of these infinite perspectives of Consciousness of Indras Net forms then the totality of the manifested side of Infinite Consciousness. Or "form". And beyond, and yet also in it as its essence, in a truly nondual way, it the Absolute, or Infinite Reality. Infinite Impersonal totally Empty Boundless Timeless Consciousness. That way of perceiving Reality solves all problems of Solipsism, and leaves one with True Nonduality. And that way of perceiving is a pointer that (if practiced until achieving its referent/meaning, Enlightenment) actually points and leads not to a cosmic ego of infinitely bloated dimension, identifying in unity with the whole Kosmos, and only ending in the claws of the separate-self contraction and the suffering that the ego is at its core, but to an enlightened Mindstream of Impersonal Infinite Consciousness/Infinite Reality. And the freedom from suffering, bliss and love these awakened states carry as their essence. Selling Water by the River

Lovely Pointers. Thanks for the post. Yes, words fail. I don't mean to describe the Absolute as blind in any way. That is not its nature. If any, its nature IS Awareness, at its core. But too much "its" in this sentence of mine, and Awareness is not any "thing" being pointed to, despite the word awareness is a noun. One can go via the via negativa path: Nothingness. Or with positive description of properties or potential or "doing": Awareness. Potential for sentience. Or Awareness of perceptions perceiving themselves. At the end, "it" is empty, aware, nondual, infinite, all there is. And the Infinite Reality beyond all appearance. And IT is ones True Self. Nondual, Infinite. One without a second. Pure Impersonal Infinite Consciousness, Infinite Reality itself. Unchanging, Silent, eternal, unchanging, unmoving, without "anything" being possibly outside of it (infinite). So all "via negative", not this not that. And its potential or essence of Awareness. But Awareness is a "loaded" concept, see below. The negative concept are more uncritical. Nothing is as close to the divine as silence. And Nothingness as pointer for example covers Deep Sleep quite well. While describing the Absolute only as Awareness would cause probably some hard time understanding it for a non-enlightened being, since the experience/"memory" of it is different. As long as one can intuit right now what is still present in Deep Sleep, which can not not be there, it aligns again. Nothingness, as defined by Andrew Hawal, God is Nothingness. A pointer I personally like a lot. No danger of "solidfying" it as some kind of thing, or not empty consciousness. And "the" Awareness, or potential for it, clearly stil there Appendix I of "God is Nothingness" Some readers may be wondering why I say that awareness is not the Absolute, despite the fact that so many ancient scriptures and eminent teachers say that they are identical. For instance, Nisargadatta taught that consciousness is rooted in (and therefore limited to) the physical human form, while awareness transcended the individual body and was actually the Absolute—that everything is Universal Consciousness. This is more of an instructive approach than a philosophical commitment. If pressed as to whether the Absolute is awareness or not, I would say, like Huang Po did, that, “Mind is not mind, yet neither is it no-mind.” In Nothingness, there is some degree of awareness present—it is not how most people imagine brain death—albeit unconditioned, object- and subjectless. The Consciousness (for lack of a better word) of Non-being is so subtle that the moment we try to reflect upon it to check if we are conscious, we are jarred back into ‘being’ and into our ordinary dualistic consciousness. I hesitate even to call this experience “pure subjectivity,” for that invites a metaphysical position that I am not willing to support. In the end, to paraphrase Socrates, all that I know is Nothing. This Consciousness has shed all of the characteristics that people normally identify with awareness, such as perspective, spatial and temporal contexts, objects, ownership, etc. Yet, if there were no awareness, then it would be impossible to differentiate the numinous Nothingness from how people conventionally conceive of blankness or being comatose. Personally, I think that differentiating between Nothingness and consciousness is helpful, and that is my ultimate goal—to help people realize Non-being or Absolute Consciousness. At that point, I can care less whether people call it Nothingness, God, Brahman, Buddha Nature, One Mind, Universal Consciousness, or a kangaroo. Names at that point, after the Absolute has been realized, are insignificant." Yes, and that needs to be added. I can understand why you write that. All Pointers at the end are not it, but arise in it. Probably some resonate more with certain pointers than with others. We are all just starting communicating that. There are no studies showing which pointers work better for which practitioner. And that should be the goal: To get the maximum number of people to get "it". Of course not in a grasping way. So, I can just state the Pointers that worked for me. And for other practitioners wired similiar as me, probably could work too. And try to intuit which pointers probably work for the largest number of beings. Anyway, as we both know, the bliss & love these awakened nondual states of Pure Infinite Consciousness bring, leading to a drowning of the activities and self-contraction of the separate self, conversing about pointers arising within IT is just some minor nuisance that one just does to be able to communicate it at least a bit. I do have a faible for trying to align the pointers of different systems/traditions/teachings. Being able to explain which mystic used which pointer (and some are quite contradicting, for example the topic of Its Awareness vs. Awareness is not it), and what he/she means with the concepts. If for example using the term/pointer/concept "Awareness", there is a huge spectrum ranging from Awareness OF, to Pure witnessing Awareness to Nondual Unity Awareness to Infinite boundless timeless Awareness.... And that faible for aligning the pointers of different systems comes from having needed to do that on the path. My path. And there many many paths up the mountain, and many many pointers.... Ah, UnbornTao, please hit me. Seems I can't write short posts. Water by the River

according to my current understanding, which is recent and surely must be quite nuanced, reality is not a mind, it is the total infinity that it is. total infinity gives rise to a mind that has attributes such as intelligence and will, which limits and creates forms getting blind to the infinity and creating the finite. this mind is also limited in some way because if it were not, it would not create limitation. Ultimately, the absolute is undifferentiated, infinite, and total, without creation or activity. First, I am in full alignment with everything Moksha said. That description is precise, beautiful, and doesn't have the problem that many other pointers have. That said: I would have probably never gotten it from the usual very concise pointers. Maybe I would have, but much much later. Of that I am convinced. Looking back after got it, its totally clear what is meant with these pointers. What is written below would have helped me quite a lot back in the day. So excuse the length please. Topic 1: Why does Huang Po use Universal Mind? Why is Infinite or Absolute a better pointer, althoug Universal Mind/Infinite Consciousness is still correct? Better Pointer is: Infinite Reality. Absolute. Because no object/appearance = No Awareness. Infinite. Empty. Nothingness. Similiar to Deep Sleep. Not exactly the same, but by definition "one" is still existing then, else one wouldn't come back in the morning. And one can't say what Infinite Reality is, because it is infinite. Infinite Reality IS. So best pointer is: Infinite Reality. Nothingness. Not yet awareness or mind. But: Infinite Reality has the potential/capacity for sentience/awareness. As soon as something shows up, then its no longer Infinite. Massaros water pistol example of a waterpistol just appearing in Infinite Vastness (which was "the case" before the water pistol/anything showed up. The potential for awareness just showed up as awareness, because an object and duality appeared. So because of this potential for sentience/Awareness, one can describe IT as Universal Mind, Infinite Consciousness/Awareness. But even more precise is Infinite Reality/Nothingness. Because without anything appearing, it isn't really a mind. It is IT. Infinite. But also not different from Impersonal Infinite Consciousness/Awareness. It all depends on the meaning of the concepts/pointers. Wolinsky goes the hardcore-path: The Absolute/Infinity Reality/True You is NOT Awarnesness nor Consciousness. He described Awareness/Consciousness as Awareness OF, Consciousness OF. And rejects Awareness/Consciousness as Absolute. Because for him its always Awareness OF, Consciousness OF. Which is not incorrect, see the Water Pistol example. That is also correct. Same does Andrew Halaw, and his pointer Nothingness. So the problem with Awareness is: There is always (!) an Awareness OF, even if its a subtle formless object, like certain causal states. An infinite darkness suffused with light. Ok, what is the light? Ah,... . Without the OF (or the object appearing), Awareness is still there, but more as potential. Infinite. Or Nothing/empty. These Dualities collapse then. And that is the most important meaning of all of it. At the Absolute and Infinite Reality, any duality or any pointer just collapses. Infinite. Empty/Nothing specific. Potential for Awareness. And all of that not different things, but ONE without a second, Infinite. Real Nondual Infinite. Topic 2: And then, the separate-self, the self-reflective mind: Looking AT something thinking it is one self, or looking over its shoulds trying to see itself, and generating an EXPERIENCE of emptiness/Nothingness/Awareness/blank/whatever. JUST AN EXPIRIENCE, not real you/Infinite/Absolute. And next challenge is: The separate-self is a self-reflexive movement in Infinite Reality: Consciousness turning its head back to see itself, doesn't see itself of course, has an EXPERIENCE of Nothingness/emptiness/Infinity. And this LOOKING over its shoulder IS the Illusion of the separate self, of the self-reflective mind. And that movement of looking over its shoulds happens IN Infinite Reality/IN Infinite Consciousness. And all doubting/searching/reflecting/thinking that is it/what is it/that is not/do I have it/do I understand it.... ALL of that is "movement" within Infinite Consciousness, OBJECTS appearing, staying, disappearing. Moving within oneself. And even the understanding/realization/Enlightenment happens within it, within Pure Impersonal Infinite Consciousness/Infinite Reality that can be unaware of itself. One never can get "out" of this Infinite. And Infinite Reality is NEVER and object. It is not the experience of "oneself" or anything within it TRYING to see itself (the eye can't see itself). Jac O'Keffe: Primary Consciousness (her term for Infinite Reality and Infinite Consciousness) IS SUCH A FUNDAMENTAL that it CANT TURN AROUND AND SEE ITSELF. Cant look back over its shoulder to see itself. That would be a movement within it. Please watch this video a few times: "Primary Consciousness (Infinite Consciousness) is such a fundamental it CANT SEE ITSELF." Ok, I am rambling on. Please go through the links & video a few times. There are enough pointers in there to really get it. And sorry guys if it is so long. I can't make it shorter and still get the meaning across with any reasonable chance. If anybody can make it shorter, and still get the complexity of it across, please let me know. You get a few free beers from me while you explain me how to do it shorter. I also can do the frog pond plop, or Infinite Mind, or whatever in a one liner. Just probably nobody will get it.,, The way above, probably also nearly nobody will get it. Takes awakened states. But maybe some who are on the edge will, and others will have a better map up the mountain, and will spot and get what to do/where to go at certain stages. Bon voyage! Selling Water by the River

Ready not, here we come! ... whaddayathink? Are the Aliens ready for some visits from primitive humans knocking at their door? Is that good for the welfare & health of the Alien dominion, or will they die laughing when "primitive us" pop up in their realms on intravenous DMT? The "other" Alien Consciousness course, by Hancock/Strassman/Gallimore. Sure more focused on the "other" Alien itself and not on understanding Reality/God itself. But hey: Doesn't the Alien on the picture look kinda cute? Interesting times for sure! Water by the River PS: @Bazooka Jesus In case you feel really "pushed out of your original professional calling, did you read that with the "intravenous DMT"? Aliens? Volunteers? Although yours truly will always consider himself not at all able to follow in the impressive jester-footsteps you luckily continue to leave us till this day, and so can't understand how the one-and-only unreplaceable Bazooka Jesus can even have such thoughts arising in his mindstream...

Very true. Love your comments, metaphors, pictures and film recommendations by the way. They really enrich the forum. GQs tumbling in the dungeon. The poor chap caught in the slimy cube. And your way of highlighting the obvious and less than obvious things. And Russell doing the: "Are you not entertained? Are you not entertained ?!" What a marvelous collection of ladies and gentlemen in this forum! Each and every one playing its unique role. Water by the River

Agreed. LD50 of H2O is 90g/kg. So, its deadly after more than 2 days without, but also gets annoying in too high doses. Same on this side over here. Luckily, the noisy little watery bug comes with an offswitch. Hope my kind of humor is not too annoying. Yours truly at least is more annonyed by serious preaching without any self-irony. And you know, somehow gotta tell the gospel. But like I wrote before, too much sand&sweat&blood while acting in these kind of movies.... and the role is already taken by another actor. Anyway, I hear ya! Water by the River

Yes, probably the Alien faction without a sense of style & proportion. They gotta have some of these characters too! And who did that over Nuremberg back in the day 1561? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1561_celestial_phenomenon_over_Nuremberg What posing! No style & decency. For more funny playing with humans: Visionary: The Mysterious Origins of Human Consciousness: the Definitive Edition of Supernatural, Hancock Selling Water by the River

@UnbornTao Gotta work on my shorter responses & revealing the real river sometimes... Whaddayasay? How much of that ( above) can humanity actually endure? Rumours have it that Water by the River will be promoted degraded to court fool [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jester]: With the licence for some Ancient Greek comedy [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Greek_comedy] and Kabuki. The only one at court that it save from instant-execution for blasphemy and lèse-majesty (like in, execution of the court fool would be a bit against conventions, poor guy only doing its job, so not so cool...), but has to wear "brightly colored clothes and eccentric hats" while doing so. @Bazooka Jesus will consult me on the compilation of the new jester-dress, for sure. Water by the River

Well, every truth needs somebody stating it. Liked your post btw. Smart & cool and in style. So, since we have made it (maybe ) out of the negging phase with the profanity, let's dance! Water by the River

Very wise answer, much smarter than yours truly. And actually true. frog pond plop - Basho Relative Pointers to the mountain summit, and the different lower peaks/ridges below it leading up there? Maybe a "climbing map" showing the safe way up there? To avoid the dragons/hic sunt dracones, and the paths leading back to the valley? Not today, darling. Selling Water by the River

ok, here comes the take of yours truly. Warning: Bumpy conceptual ride ahead! All of them: concepts, used with differing meaning in different concepts. Not any kind of Absolute Truth, but concepts appearing in IT. Below is the take of yours truly on the most common usage. Void: Anything from a state (causal, void state) to Ultimate Reality. But is better used as a state description Truth: Normally pointer to Absolute Reality. Absolute Reality: Same. Absolute Solipsism: Trying to think ones way via conceptual thinking to the Absolute Reality which is infinite, and which can mostly only be described in negative terms, since any positive description would limit it. Doing the Universal Mind/Infinite Consciousness thing of Huang-Po (see last post) is ok. But confusing this Impersonal Infinite Consciousness with a mind-stream that is not fully awakened, aka where a separate self confuses itself with Ultimate Reality, is, uh, not so smart. Biggest Problem: Proponents of that normally don't have awakened/enlightened states in daily life. Biggest Risk: Narcicissm, not Ego-death but Cosmic-Ego. Identifying separate self or any kind of identity/self with Totality. Usefulness for the Path to the Mountain Summit/Nothingness/Absolute: Shooting ones knee with a gun and then trying to start walking and proclaiming how fast one got already on the mountain summit while limping in the valley Alien Consciousness: Some understanding on the form/manifestation side of Infinite Consciousness, albeit much more than a human is capable off in non-tripping-states, on a very high level. Better yet, ask the creator of that concept. Yours truly has no intelectual ownership on it. Danger: Proclaiming that as more important than Full Enlightenment, or letting go of the separate-self illusions that cover ones Deep Identity as Impersonal Nothingness/Infinite Consciousness/Absolute Reality, in which every appearance/thougt/self-concept-arising can only arise as Illusion/Dream/Mirage. Leads apparently to chasing the next Awakening, n+1. And not being quite happy on a permanent basis. God Realization anything from Full Enlightenment to a tool to bash any form of Awakening/Enlightenment one doesn't like. Depens on the usage and author using that term. For the bashing-anything-else-version of it, clear definitions are usually not given. Could sound like Full Enlightenment if really spelled out explicitely. No-Self tricky term. In its highest meaning: the final death/transcedence of each and any separate self arising. True No-Self. can be also be used for anything from no-Ego, no-Person, like opaque witness or transparent witness. should only be used for Pure Impersonal Nothingness/Impersonal Infinite Consciousness to avoid confusions. The most interesting conept/pointer would be Full Enlightenment. For that, see my last posts. Selling Water by the River

And off we go again.. How about considering the context of the statement of Boddhidharma, to highlight that the Absolute is always right here (by definition), in all ordinariness also? Of course, IT is doing the 7 wonders of the Universe/Aliens and more, but that is not the context of that statement. For that, like I wrote, see something like the Supreme Source. Or other stuff. Ok, got it. One could get the impression that there is some trying to scare away other perspectives by profanity and mere claims, devoid of any arguments. Rational exchange of perspectives based on mutual respect ahoi! Oh well. To each his own. Oh, sorry, only partly politically correct nowadays. Suum cuique. That is still ok nowadays. Selling Water by the River

Please let me invite for the daily Buddhism-bashing. Today, Huang-Po-style: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huangbo_Xiyun "One Mind Huángbò's teaching centered on the concept of “mind” (Chinese: hsin), a central issue for Buddhism in China for the previous two centuries or more. He taught that mind cannot be sought by the mind. One of his most important sayings was “mind is the Buddha”. He said: All the Buddhas and all sentient beings are nothing but the One Mind, beside which nothing exists. The One Mind alone is the Buddha, and there is no distinction between the Buddha and sentient beings." "All the Buddhas and all sentient beings are nothing but the Universal Mind, beside which nothing exists. This Mind, which is without beginning, is unborn and indestructible. It is not green nor yellow, and has neither form nor appearance. It does not belong too the categories of things which exist or do not exist, nor can it be thought of in terms of new or old. It is neither long nor short, big nor small, for it transcends all limits, measures, traces, and comparisons." Huang Po, Blofeld John, trans. "The Zen Teachings of Huang Po" Serious and non-profane comments on the inadequacy of that pointer/description welcome. Selling Water by the River

Thanks. I am trying to be as concise as possible. Balancing it with "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler" Times are near when all the complex stuff has been covered in previous posts. Then, yours truly is looking forward to retire , just writing a few concise lines, and maybe sometimes a link to the old post for the aficionado. Water by the River

yeah, maybe he even said that sometimes in the spirit of Who knows? And if one needs a bit more pathos when it comes to Ultimate Reality: The Supreme Source. And for more technical precision on the Clap of the One Hand (or at least, until shortly below IT), more references on request. But I guess we don't want a serious (or not so serious), detailed and cool/non-profane discussion, do we? Selling Water by the River

thanks hey, give me a smile, hm Water by the River

sure? Selling Water by the River

frog pond plop stolen from - Basho Water by the River

Thank you. I hesitated to link that quote of approval Leo has given to the Supreme Source/Kulayarāja Tantra. Leo will probably never approve anything like that ever again. On the other side, considering the current trip and bashing since then, he wouldn't do anyway. But who knows... Lets see if some reasons come across for downplaying Full Enlightenment vs. "God-Realization" Leo-style. I just fear he is racking up lots of bad Karma. And at the end of the day every being just wants a happy & blissful life. Like every being, by definition. Everything else is fooling ourselves. And bad Karma can prevent that happy and blissful life . For him and his followers. Such is the Intelligence of the Universe and Maya. But the game/Lila needs its heroes. And there are also Tragic Heroes. And heroes go into dragon-land: Hic sunt dracones. Hic sunt Aliens. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragic_hero Nothing new under the sun... Water by the River PS: Although my view is higher than the sky, My respect for the cause and effect of actions is as fine as grains of flour. – Padmasambhava “Guru Rinpoche”. That is the quote I orient my life on a relative level on. A deal with the Universe, so to say. And it has served me very very well. Like in "wouldn't have believed how well" 10 years ago, what can be possible. But that is another story I won't tell for the foreseeable future. Nobody, even the Enlightened Ones, are above the law of Karma. It is the nature of such a coherent dream/Universe of ours. Just the emotional/suffering severity of the impact varies. And the not stable enlightened ones, and not enlightened ones, are in the merciless claws of Samsara. And that is why the quote above is of paramount importance.

@Leo Gura Oh, there are and were plenty who did understand exactly that.... It is called Full Enlightenment. How many books did you read on Buddhism/from Buddhism? Which traditions? And to make such a statement "no Buddhist comprehends": Do you know all Buddhists personally? Why not say no Buddhist I know comprehends this.... And did the Supreme Source got declassified as a description of God Realization (Link below) in the meantime by the n+1 next Awakening? And if so, how and why? Just a humble question, I am really curious. Supreme Source/Kulayarāja Tantra https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kulayarāja_Tantra That is one of the "bibles" of Dozgchen. Like, many many many aficinados of that text in Tibet & realized beings in the past. "According to the Tibetologist David Germano, the Kunjed Gyalpo "is the main canonical work of the Great Perfection [Dzogchen] as it emerges from the "dark period" (850 to 1000 C. E.)" And on Buddhism: Which fully enlightened being in his right mind having walked a Buddhist Path to Full Enlightenment would consider himself as "Buddhist"? And like, really believe it? Like "I" am a Buddhist .There probably umteenth different systems to Enlightenment at many Alien-species in the Universe with its billions of planets... And which Buddhist Full Enlightened Realizer would see Buddhism NOT as a dream? Not a single one, see below. For example, check 3 Pillars of Zen, Kapleau, dialogue Harada to Yaeko: Yaeko, [newly fully enlightened] I simply can’t understand why I always made such a to-do about respecting Buddhism or anyone who had attained full enlightenment. Have I been dreaming? Harada Roshi: Dreaming? Certainly. Yet as dreams go in this world it is not the commonplace dream of most but a dream of tremendous and lasting significance, of intense absorption in the Buddha’s Dharma. And once fully enlightened, often byebye monastery & Buddhism orthodoxy, see below: "When my master realized the complete extinction of the dualistic mind, his life changed radically. In order to avoid problems with the authorities, as he was certain they would not understand, he left his monastery and retreated to a hermitage, where only a few disciples could find him. I too went to visit him in that wild place. At that time I had not yet received this teaching so I was surprised by his behaviour, but I was not outraged because my faith in him was absolute. I noticed my master did not do any more formal practice and did not even bestow the initiations to which we were accustomed. He continued to give teachings of various kinds, according to his disciples' capacities, however in a style that was much simpler than before. Moreover, on specific occasions he also performed rituals for his disciples but his actions were new and I did not know their meaning. One fine day I decided to ask the master what his spiritual practice was. He remained silent, perfectly still, staring into my eyes. Under the influence of his silence, I too became silent and entered, for a moment, into a limpid, non-conceptual state. After a while, I heard the master say that that was the direct transmission of the sacred wordless revelation, the teaching beyond scriptures and symbols. " Mahämudrä and Atiyoga, Giuseppe Baroetto Lovely book by the way... And on Buddhism as system to Enlightenment, an analogy: If the ideal of Christianity is the Saint... How much Saints did it produce? Quite some. But compared to the Totality of believers, next to none. Horrible and hilariously low success rate. Does Christianity have paths that end up with Sainthood if fully walked? Yes. How many walk the path? See above. If the ideal of Buddhism is the Fully Enlightened Realizer... How much Fully Enlightened did it produce? Quite some. But compared to the Totality of believers/practitioners, next to none. Horrible and hilariously low success rate. Does Buddhism have paths that end up with Full Enlightenmentif fully walked? Yes. How many walk the path? See above. So is it justified to bash complete Buddhism? Why don't you make some nice definitions of what God-Realization is according to your definition, and why that is higher than FULL Enlightenment? With emphazis on FULL Enlightenment, in which each and every and possible appearance/arising/separate-self anything is seen as mere appearance/manifestation/illusion/dream IN THAT (One without a second, Absolute, Nothingness), and each and every backgroundstory (history, others, past, spiritual system, separate self-arising, ANYTHING) is seen as dream/mirage/illusion? As dream/mirage/illusion arising here and now, its essence being Nothingness. Not the partial Enlightenments, which are probably 50 times more common than the real thing. In the partial Enlightenments, of course there is still the background-BS-story still active, because the separate-self (even the empty and unity/nondual version of it) still dreams its dream? A more lucid dream, but not woken up yet? The constant similiarity between all FULL Enlightenment descriptions is: ALL is dream, ALL is Lila, ALL is Illusion/mirage, All is show. Lila= Absolute/God/Reality fooling itself to play a little game... And not only ALL of it is a Dream/Fooling oneself, ANY possible n+1 form/arising can only be dreaming/fooling oneself. How can God Realization go "deeper" in understanding the illusion of "how God fools itself" than Full Enligthenment, if in Full Enlightenment each and any concept/feeling-arising, especially deep ones of the separate-anything-self, are seen as fooling oneself? Like in, any possible form at all, n+1? I mean, we can postpone that discussion until your Course is done & sold. But at some point it would be really nice to have some substantial feedback on that. And "can't be put into words" doesn't count, Full Enlightenment can also not be put into words. Yet very good pointers can be used, if done so in a smart way. And the concepts/talking can be done up to a quite high altitude of the mountain, shortly below the summit. If done skillfully, and investing the effort. At least, give it a try. And if you say that can only be understood after umpteenth trips on 5 MeO or whatever... I just would like to ask the reader to watch these three videos, and ask himself in which state he would like to be (and feel) himself? And maybe end up? It is wise to choose ones teachers on how they feel and how happy they are, because one could feel the same after walking their path for 5 years... (and by the way: How can one be gaslit when all is a dream arising in Suchness?) or Not that Adi Da didn't f*** up as Cult-Leader in the words of Ken Wilber (more comments on Adi Da here): Anyway, no disrespect! I highly value your endeavours up until around the Solipsism Video/Infinity of Gods.... Then it looked like some remains of some identity/separate self were projected on Infinite Absolute Reality/Nothingness, and you didn't get the bliss & love of stable Realization of Impersonal Infinite Consciousness in daily life. but got fascinated by relative/form/manifested-stuff, of the Alien version and the like. The searching for the camera to capture Alien god because the ones available couldn't capture it.... was a bit worrisome. I really got worried about you. But still, what counts is the spirit and motivation, and everything before the videos mentioned above was worthy of a true pioneer in these unchartered territories. In that sense, I am looking forward to an answer from you, preferably of the cool, substantiated and a bit elaborate kind. Doesn't need to be now. If you need to make up your mind about these topics, and if takes months or longer, no problem. Fine with me. Thank you, and Namaste! Water by the River