Salvijus

@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.

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

Connecting to different energies before the practice is a real thing. Try meditating in a church and then try meditating in a zen temple, you'll see the energy and the results will be very different. In a similar way, your kundalini practice may have an element of grace without which the practice is not complete. There're forces that contribute to your spiritual growth much more then your personal efforts. It's really hard to explain the importance of it without sounding illogical and crazy. If it is really hard for you digest these ideas then at least experiment with a mantra and without a mantra for some time.

So are you 100% confident a state of total stillness, detachment and uninvolment doesn't exist? It feels like this convo is not getting anywhere. I guess we have different views of enlightenment and what it entails and lets just leave it at that.

Had a pleasure to receive the darshan of an opera concert live today. There were some truly godly heavenly moments. I've also been blessed to have tickets to the upcoming Andrea Bocelli concert. Listening to these sounds in a live concert is going to be an Epic experience i feel. Even today was all goosebums.

What i would propose that one doesn't lead to the other. Meaning that if one abides in emptiness absorbtion, will not have the element of nondual love. And if one abides in nondual love he will not know absolute emptiness and detachment at that moment. At best one can jump from one state to another but cannot be at both simultaneously.

It's possible to see the truth in multiple perspectives. You can see the truth that your eternal nature is not a state and it never changes, it remains the same under all conditions. And you can also see the truth that you can reach higher levels of consciouness, energy, intensity etc. Both views are true somehow.

Beautifully put

No im talking about total elimination of boundaries as well. But im also saying there are two ways to eliminate your boundaries. One is through total inclusiveness, and that results in love, passion etc. And another is through detachment, that results in stillness and no care or interest in anything. And in both states there's total union, and no boundaries.

I see where we diverge now. Because i would argue they are not the same. One can achieve total oneness through inclusiveness of the heart and it will have a strong quality of love, passion, creativity, desire to help others. And one can achieve total union through total detachment and awareness and it will have a quality of stillness, silence, no interest in the world. Both lead to oneness but also have interesting differences. This video talks about it a bit

Based on your describtion sounds like it almost worked lol Now enjoy the awkwardness.

The describtion says, Lama entered nirvana and left the body conciously in meditation.

I understand this part. But i'm trying to say there are different states that cause an enlightened being to behave in different ways. Yes there're states of total inclusiveness that results in nondual unconditional love you're talking about. But that's not the only state. There're also a state of total detachment, with zero interest, zero care, zero involvement etc. In that type of emptiness absorbtion an enlightened being can indeed be totally apathetic to the environment. So is there a counter-argument to that? Because an explanation of what nondual love is doesn't counter my statement imo.

@Moksha okey im losing track of what we're talking about again So first you say, it's incorrect to assume that enlightened being will be apathetic to others. I gave you my counter-argument why there are people who may be enlightened and not care about anything in the world. Was there a further counter-argument from your side? I can't figure out... you started talking about sat-chit-ananda for some reason ?