Salvijus

@Water by the River i think i can make it less confusing and propose this kind of framing. non physical energy (nothingness) is observing physical energy (coffee table). Ultimately it's just energy observing different manifestations of itself. But it's the primordial formless energy that is observing the manifest formful manifestaion, not the other way around.

This is pretty clean actually. Let me try putting it this way tho. Primordial non physical energy capable of awareness is there alone without any objects of observation and has nothing to observe. Then non physical energy takes a form of physical manifestaion, a grosser form of the same energy. Now nonphysical energy is observing other grosser manifestations of itself. Hense existence is observing itself. I would agree with this kind of framing But perhaps primordial non physical energy is the most intelligent form of energy capable of being aware alone. This I'm unsure of. But i intuit it is so.

It has something to do with ego i believe.

Everything is energy. Manifestion is gross energy, nothingness is primordial non physical energy. In that sense i would agree everything is one. It's one energy manifestaing in different ways.

Sounds kinda fun ?

I would agree that a small part of you vanishes when a coffee table vanishes. But your essental nature never vanishes no matter how many objects in the universe were to vanish. Hence that formless nothingness would fit the definition of absolute the best and everything else is also you, but it's your secondary nature, not primary.

That's clever. But let me challenge this. Who observes that the coffee table has vanished? There's somone else observing the coffee table coming into existence and then dissapearing. I would agree that observer and the objects of observation are ultimately one, but not the same. Bc if it was the same, then if a coffee table was to vanish, YOU would vanish with it.

@Breakingthewall there is one state in buddhism called nibbana where all experience is gone, all taste, sound, feelings, visions, thoughts, etc everything is gone except the primordial awareness witness that observes things arise and pass away. A state like that would make a very clear distinction that there is an absolute observer and there are temporary changeful objects of observation that come out of that infinite void. Absolute observer can exist without the objects of observation, objects of observation cannot exists without observer being there in the first place. I think this is a king argument that can't be beaten. ?

How so? Here's a question to challange this. Are you observing the coffee table or is the coffee table observing you? Clearly observer and the objects of observation are not the same, they are one i agree, but not the same.

Observer can exist without the objects of observation. Objects of observation cannot exist without the observer. Your true nature is absolute and eternal, your secondary nature is changeful and temporary. Your secondary nature is still part of you, but it's not your essencial nature. Because objects depend on the observer, observer doesn't depend on anything. IT IS ABSOLUTE! I should put this as a quote beneath my posts ?

@Breakingthewall Silence can exist without the sound, sound cannot exist without the silence is also thought provoking statement that show they are not equal dimensions of existence. It shows that one is absolute and another is dependant on the other to exist

Is sound the same as the silence? I would agree that they are one but i would not agree that they are the same. It makes more sense to me by definition to call silence absolute never changing essence of the universe. And sound as a manifestation which is changeful and relative etc.. ultimately they are one, but not the same.

@Breakingthewall if the only color that existed was blue, we would not know what is blue, we only know what is blue because we have different colors to contrast it against. Similary we know what is changeful, because there's something inside us that is absolute and never changes. How's that? Sounds logical to me.

I hope you're wrong ?

Infinite change is cool. But is there something that never changes? Perhaps the pure witness who witnesses all changes happening would be the answer?

Okey i see what you did there. By that definition all experience of the present moment could be labeled as absolute Let me rise another question then. If a sound can vanish, is it eternal? And the second question, if sound is not eternal, how can it be absolute? Because absolute means by your definition it has no opposite. So if sound can exist and then stop existing, can it be called absolute?

Interesting. Allow me to challenge this view. By definition absolute means that which never changes. So an open question becomes. Do sounds change? Yes, all the time. Does silence ever change ? No Does silence have degrees? No Does silence have different forms? No By definition only the silence is absolute, never changing, without any levels. It is our true nature, pure witness, primordial awareness. Out this nothingness/silence comes the sound/manifestaion. And manifestaion is not absolute it is relative. By definition no sound, no cloud, no phenomenal experience can be absolute (unless your definition of absolute is something else) This would be my counter perspective to what you sayed that only the absolute exists. I think there's a flaw in logic there.

Then the next stage of nonduality would be to recognize that silence and sound are inherantly one. But still silence remains the absolute and sound remains the relative. We can have silence without the sounds, but we can't have sounds without the silence. Or we can have sky without the clouds but we can't have clouds without the sky. Nothingness is king, manifestaion is the queen.

The point you make here is interesting. Nondual teachers would say, there's something beyond experience. Experience comes and goes and is not absolute. Like music, sounds come and go, but silence is absolute and has no levels. Without silence sounds could not exist, sounds are temporary, silence is eternal. Silence stands for our primordial awareness that has no quality our true nature.

@Breakingthewall i think you're talking about two experiences or two states. one state is when in our perception everything is one Another state is when in our perception we feel seperation and duality In this context enlightenment is an experience or a state of perception. When clouds of ego are veiling the awareness it feels like everything is fragmented. When clouds of ego are gone, all sense of separation is gone. Yea, that's why it's called nothingness btw. Intangiable, incomprehensible, immesuarble, the womb of existence. Where all states come and go, even the change of perception is happening inside this awareness that undergoes no change. Not sure where im going with this one even

True. But it could be argued that the sky itself is not a state. Whether there are clouds or there are no clouds, sky is uneffected. There is no such thing as first stage sky then, second stage sky etc. It's always the same, primordial, never changes, perfect, absolute. So by definition it could be sayed it is not a state, because states are changful, and the sky is beyond every change. Not very well articulated but still, you can get the point.

Listening to Lord's prayer in original Aramaic language can definitely tune you into the energy of Christ. I think that's a helpful example of what these chantings can do.

@M A J I :) okey, if you say so

No no. I heard you loud and clear. It's just that i see it differently.

You're right i need to work on my triggeres when people trash talk on beutiful beings. However you clearly have some beef with certain spiritual figures yourself and your desire to discredit them comes not from Light and peace. A good opportunity to reflect on your own shortcomings. ?