OrdinaryAwareness

@Dodoster I want to take a minute to apologize to you. Although my original intent in commenting on this thread was sincere and I really did think I was helping you in some way, I realize, in retrospect, that I was being self-righteous (which, ironically enough, was exactly what I was calling you out for in the first place). Unfortunately, a thread that was likely meant to be a lighthearted joke devolved into pushing you around because I, deluded by my own presuppositions, misunderstood its intent and for that, I'm sorry.

He's a charlatan.

Nope, sorry, but that's untrue. Read some of my other posts if you want evidence for that, I'm not going to re-hash the same things again here.

The Jiva, the apparent person, does exist. It is just not real. There is a distinction there. Not real just means that it is not permanent. There is simply no arguing whether or not the person exists because it is self-evident. What is real (permanent) is the awareness that knows and composes the Jiva. Stopping thoughts does not change the consciousness that knows those thoughts. Your experience of the world is only intensifying because you are focusing on something other than your thoughts now, not because the awareness has changed in any way. I re-read what I wrote multiple times to ensure that I wasn't contradicting myself. I wasn't, you're misunderstanding what is being said. False claim. You, awareness, must be present in order for intellectualization to be known. There is no separation between the subject (awareness) and the object (the intellectual thought). The thought depends upon awareness to be known, the awareness is unaffected by the presence or absence of the thought. You don't become more of what you already are. You are already aware, this is it, knowledge is used to understand this fact by negating ignorance.

I haven't read it, but just skimmed the wikipedia page... I laughed hard. Also given that Tolle's major teaching is "be in the Now" and that's not enlightenment his recommendation doesn't really mean much does it? No disrespect towards you, you seem like someone who's serious about self-inquiry if you're willing to follow a book for a year. If you're looking for the real deal, then learn Vedanta, don't waste time with this book.

Our existence is self-evident. The fact that you can write that and I can read that already shows that we exist. That said, the Jiva is unreal (apparently real) in the sense that it is impermanent. Unreal does not equal non-existent. And that is what we are existentially. Consciousness is real, the body-mind (Jiva) is unreal, but, to reiterate, not non-existent. And yes, we can know what we are by intellectualizing, we're awareness/consciousness... sorry to ruin the surprise but that's all there is to what we are. There is no such thing as enlightenment because what we are, awareness, is always the light that illumines our experience. There is never a point where awareness is "unenlightened" and then all of a sudden "enlightened." There is no need to escape our human form because what we are is the limitless consciousness which is taking the form of a human. The Jiva is know to awareness and composed of awareness. And there is no separation between this awareness and God. God is not some anthropomorphized being in the sky, it is the same limitless consciousness that is our essential nature. We do not experience consciousness directly because it is not an object, it is the subject. But it doesn't need to be experienced directly in order to be liberated.

First off, it is important to understand the difference between nonexistence and unreal. We do exist, but we are unreal in the sense that something that is real is always real, meaning that it is permanent. So in terms of apparent reality, we do exist and it does appear to be a duality. However, reality is non-dual, your awareness is not different from my awareness, just as any emotion that you feel is no different from any emotion that I would feel. The circumstances or experiences can and likely will be different, but the awareness that knows those experiences is the same. Regardless of how much you learn about enlightenment or possibly have transcendental experiences (which are not actually important at all, contrary to what most people seem to believe) you have, you will never actually perceive oneness. You will just know that oneness is always occurring because all objects appear in you and are composed of you, awareness. What you experience is apparent reality, it is always changing and it is not necessarily true (something that is true is always true and nothing in experience other than awareness is always true). The disconnect is between knowledge and experience. Knowledge tells us one thing, but we experience something else. The problem is that intuition derived as a result of experience is often wrong. Proper knowledge, from a proven teaching, provides the tools for liberation. Individual experiences and insights virtually never do so.

All good! In the big picture sense you're right, what you do or say does not effect awareness in any way. It's like the characters on a screen in a movie, the characters constantly move around, act, etc. but the screen itself doesn't change because of it. We are that screen; awareness is unaffected by experiences. I guess my original intent was two fold: Pointing out that dispassion about self-inquiry and your understanding will be more liberating from the Jiva (the body-mind). We find liberation through the removal of ignorance, just because you are further along with that doesn't make you better or worse. I've done the same thing in the past, thinking that I was better than other people just because I knew more than them when it comes to self-inquiry. That doesn't bring freedom. We fool ourselves into thinking it does because we feel virtuous. But an object, such as virtue, does not affect you, the subject, awareness. There is no lasting happiness to be found there. It is in knowing who you are and what it means to be awareness that peace is found. Anyway, I'm starting to go off on a tangent so I'll stop there. One other side note though: I find the term "nothingness" to be a source of confusion. You are awareness. Awareness is not an object, so I guess we can call it nothingness since it is not tangible, but that's a pretty roundabout way of doing so.

Nah, my intention was never to argue. Just to point out that you seem to get off on thinking you're better than other people when in fact you're the same, existentially, as everyone else. I know nothing of your relationship with your ex, so I'm trying not to assume, but given that she asked how you were and your first impulse was a pompous retort illustrates a bit about you. Again, I get nothing by bashing you in any way. If I'm wrongly judging you based on a few sentences you wrote, then my apologies. If I am correct, then perhaps it'll cause you to take a look at your actions. Either way, doesn't make a difference to me.

Never said there was one.

And the point of this thread was...? The realization that you are awareness is nothing special. Knowledge of who you are does not make you special. We are all the same awareness, which means that ultimately none of us is unique. But since there is only one awareness, it means that we are existentially unique. No need to climb onto a high horse and look down on others just because you have removed some ignorance.

@Rakesh I couldn't care less that he made fun of Leo, so that's not clouding my judgement. I'm going based on his word choice in the bit that I did watch. I just watched his "How to reach enlightenment" video and listened very carefully to his language use. There are some nuances that he either doesn't get or chooses to gloss over (I'm leaning towards the former). For instance, he says "but realize that you are that which experiences." You are the non-experiencing witness, Isvara. Experience does not change consciousness. That which experiences is Maya. It is the mind, the body, etc. Isvara, awareness, is a non-experiencing witness and is reflected by Maya. Just as the moon shines by reflecting the sun. Yes, they are the same whole, but the mind is not the totality of awareness just as a wave is the ocean but the ocean is not just a wave. Forms arise in awareness and are composed of awareness, but the awareness itself is never changed. He also tends to skim over things but just saying "datatata" whenever he feels like he should extrapolate but is unable to due to an incomplete understanding. He's not completely wrong (even a broken clock is correct twice a day), but he's also not "enlightened" because if he were as enlightened as he seems to think he is then he'd know that what he truly is, awareness, is neither enlightened nor unenlightened.

No, the observer is not a thought. The "observer" is the awareness with which you knew that you were experiencing a space (silence) between thoughts. Thoughts are fleeting. Awareness/consciousness is constant.

@30secs Enlightenment is not a state experience. You are already aware. Any experience that you have will be illumined by the same awareness. And that awareness with which apparent reality is know will not be changed by the experience.

At an existential level? Yes, because we are all the same ordinary, unborn, eternal awareness. There is only one Self. But the vast majority of Jiva are ignorant of this. Enlightenment does not mean getting rid of the ego. It is the removal of ignorance.

I haven't watched Leo's video and I didn't watch more than 11 minutes of Rali's video, but it is pretty clear that Rali is not enlightened. If he was he wouldn't speak in a way that is so indicative that he is still completely identified with his body. He seems to be under the impression that enlightenment is ego-death, getting rid of programming, clearing thoughts, etc. It's not.