UnbornTao

Later this year.

The author of Nondual Perspectives on Quantum Physics is releasing a new book soon. https://tomajjavidtash.com/2018/10/29/nondual-perspectives-on-quantum-physics/

@Water by the River You seem to continue to speak of, and hold, enlightenment as something relative that is comprised of a plethora of distinctions, processes, states, duration, this and that, in addition to continuously using jargon and referencing a lot of external sources. Why? You seem to want to convince others as much as you want to convince yourself. Clear communication is getting across one's experience as it is, and it is able to stand on itself. Not so sure you're selling water at all.

Bread and toppings are but fleeting illusions, mere whispers in the vast emptiness of the pizza void. To grasp at bread is to chase the wind; to cling to toppings is to hold onto shadows. Pizza, as we perceive it, is a construct of our dualistic mind, an attachment we must transcend. In the realm of ultimate truth, there is no pizza, and yet, pizza is everywhere. Non-pizza neither affirms nor denies; it is the middle way, the path of balance and harmony. Thus, the enlightened diner sees beyond bread and toppings, savoring the taste of emptiness itself. --GPT

This relates to one aspect of your post: You're basically taking hearsay on faith. Whatever's true about anything is whatever's true for itself now. You seem to be fixating on a particular belief system such as non-duality, isms of all kinds, et al. This already undermines true investigation because it is not based on openness but on speculation and wishful thinking born out of ignorance, even by many of the creators/proponents of such cosmologies (ways of seeing the world). It is not a process and there's nothing you can do about it, except being open now and wanting to get it (contemplation) seem to help. Remember that Gautama, after having studied various schools of thought and practices, ultimately had to leave all that behind and stand on his own experience. This is already the case even before you've set out to study others.

Ken Wilber's wig pizza + Buddhist rats topping.

Better not to gossip and disparage others based on rumors about their lives.

First we'd somehow need to realize the nature of what we're talking about, which is consciousness.

Not familiar with this topic. Perhaps someone else can offer some help.

I'm not convinced he's conscious of his nature at all. Nobody with that wig can be enlightened.

Taking up an invention and being familiar with it is not the same as being able to reproduce it in your experience and comprehending how it comes to exist and work. Insights and discoveries are made by individuals. Ways of thinking get created based on these breakthroughs, and then adopted by the rest of us. Yet, the initial creative component of such inventions goes often unnoticed. We live as if familiarity implies understanding. Looking closely, however, we see that there are a lot of things that we fail to grasp and yet adopt as a given. For instance, we overlook the fact that it took a genius mind like Newton's to make a breakthrough into the principle of gravity. We now say that gravity is obvious since "everyone knows that objects fall down." We're missing something fundamental here. What Newton understood was that objects don't go sideways, float, or go up! Examples: Confusing the form an expression takes with the insight underlying it Picasso's art died with him; the ability to create that art was unique to him As a culture, we are somewhat familiar with Ancient Skepticism, yet very few of us are able to generate that kind of rigorous, deep, intelligent and multi-faceted thinking We take on the invention of language and presume to know what it is since it is a prevalent construct paramount to our survival, yet we remain unaware of its real nature Any "ism" eventually degrades into a form of shared conjecture, while the experience that precipitated said invention is missed or overlooked

Blueberries, oreo and weed.

— Ibn Arabi

Dodo and red cabbage pizza.

Pain is a process. What is it really about? Leave God alone.

Anything done mindfully and with attention works. It's about you being conscious, looking into stuff, rather than the activity bringing you consciousness. You could start by asking what's in front of you (in your experience), like: What is this emotion? Wash the dishes, walk, play, write, do Tai Chi, cook.

Chicken on pizza isn't good! I'll die on this hill.

Talk is cheap.

Not the first time The Simpsons would get it right.

Who said you should behave in this or that way? You might as well cure cancer, play video games, or anything else; reality ultimately doesn't care, but you of course do. "Should" comes from a value system or ideal. However, you don't want to use this as a justification for harmful or foolish actions. Treating others reasonably well leads to a more seamless interaction (with exceptions) and is overall an intelligent collective survival strategy. On an individual level, you wouldn't want to be treated poorly or disrespectfully. You'd realize the consequences that such behavior has on the other person. Conversely, being "good" (depends on what that means to you) generally leads to mutual benefits, even though you could spit at their face.

With mastery in mind, it ultimately isn't about what you decide to pursue, but rather that the pursuit brings to the fore (draws out) your relationship with yourself and with life.

I started writing a different response and then realized that it wouldn't cut it. We're basically talking about a possibility called "realizing the absolute" while living and being stuck in a world of relativity, so to speak. Having a few enlightenments is the answer. It would save us all this pointless intellectualization. Convenient thing to say but for some of us this is the main goal. Ramana Maharshi's first teachings, and presumably his most potent ones, were said to consist of him just being silent. Something to consider.

What do you want me to say? He's deeply conscious and knows what he's talking about. I would first study a given teaching that's promising and do some real work, then make up my mind about it. Frankly, I don't think anything I'll say will make much of a difference at this point. This is similar to the issue above; trivializing Ramana's teaching. Assuming that knowing the right spiritual terms implied any real personal understanding of what's being offered.

I've been meaning to watch it.