SOUL

@username Yes, that's pretty much my point except that I prefer to say the mind can be distracted by them, not always a distraction, otherwise this type of thinking can turn into another distraction by the mind fixating on positions, opinions and ideas are a distraction, so are. Ideas and concepts can lead us to realizing presence or away from presence, so there can be some value we get from them but the ideas in of themselves don't constitute what is called "enlightenment", it's presence.

@username My insight is that concepts and opinions about them can be a fixation to our mind.distracting us from being aware of presence. Me and you could hold completely opposite positions on every topic and concept imaginable yet both of us can be aware of presence. Getting the "right" understanding is merely a placebo for the mind in thinking it's "enlightened", though we can be "wrong" about every concept because awareness attuned to the present moment doesn't require accurate ideas.

@username Will my answer change your mind from being distracted from presence?

@username Will any of that cease the mind's distraction from presence? Or is it contributing to your mind's distraction from presence?

@username Well, sure, it can be dogmatic bullshit, any concept can be used by the mind to distract from presence. Even thinking something is or isn't dogmatic bullshit can become a concept distraction to the mind. Our awareness of being presence doesn't require we hold any position on any concept, it's only requirement is just being present to the moment and in that exercise of consciousness it is fulfilled.

@username That "no-self" stuff is just dogmatic bullshit... pun intended. The "no-self" quest is just another concept that people's minds will get fixated on and be a distraction from being present to the moment. What does 'endarken' our perception is when the sense of self distracts our awareness from being present, so to 'enlighten' our perception we attune our awareness back to being in the present moment. In the aware presence of being there is no attention being placed on concepts of self or no-self, truth or false, reality or illusion. Our attention is placed on the moment, on being here now and any sense of self that would need to be entertained are the ones that are of the moment. If they are not required for attending to the moment we can let them pass right on by without giving a second thought about them. Some animals have a sense of self, which and how many and to what degree I cannot say for sure but there are animals that have social dynamics to their genuine nature so possess a sense of self even if it's primitive compared to ours.

@username An awakening is an insight into our genuine nature while one is under the perception of being separate from that genuine nature and it is something to achieve, enlightenment is the realization, as in making it real in us, that one isn't separate from being our genuine nature through just being it in the present.....just like Sir Pawsalot is being. The difference between them and us, as it is asserted, is that they aren't aware of themselves as an aware being, they are just an aware being accepting of what is as is it without being aware themselves as such, while we are aware that we are. It's just an increased degree of awareness of being aware that we possess which ironically is what hinders us from being present, we often employ that expanded degree of awareness to be anyplace but present to the moment. So a dog or cat is "enlightened" without ever seeking enlightenment because it isn't ever not aware of being in the present moment and accepting of what is as it is, that's it's genuine nature and it doesn't cease to be it, although, it just isn't aware of it, we are aware of it. Yet we can turn our awareness away from being present in the moment through preoccupation with the past, the future, our story and a myriad of fixations.

If enlightenment is just being present in awareness and accepting what is as it is then people who spend no time at all concerned about what's real or illusion, about what's truth or false and about the "right" techniques or methods of spirituality are the most enlightened..... essentially, the most enlightened individual we know is our pets. So I will be meditating on the couch with my guru as they lick themselves.

The ego is the face of the subconscious.

Enlightened view it the way I view it, think the way I think, feel the way I feel, believe the way I believe, act the way I act, experience the way I do, perceive as I do.....that's how you can tell Ideas that aren't like mine are deluded conditioning of illusion but my ideas are the Truth and reality!

There is pleasure. there is pain, there is null thing that's not the same There is healing. there is harm, there is detachment to keep me warm. There is one thing, there is another, there is unthing that is no other. One awareness, one abyss and one time birthed one existence. Just be................... here................. now.

Yup, bullshit.... absolute bullshit.... infinite absolute bullshit.

@username Ah, that's interesting. Of course just capitalizing the word still fails to address a distinction that rarely ever gets made. The thing that people often refer to "nothingness", small "n", isn't an absence of anything, it's the presence of all things undivided, it's the all of everything in unity manifest without any delineation in the state of it that exists before any separation takes place in existence. The "Nothingness" with the big "N" is another distinction that can be made but it's the type of understanding that comes from experience in awakened awareness of a personal revelation. Without it there is no way to describe the understanding to another person, it's actually possible to conceive of but it likely is impossible to communicate.

@alyra In relation to words, yes, there is not nonduality without duality but in reality wholeness exists without duality existing. Even if we would divide the wholeness in half to create a perceived duality it still isn't really a duality because it consists of three parts, the two contrasting parts and the whole. So our mind will fixate on the perceived two contrasting halves it thinks it sees in duality while not realizing the whole, which is something that either of the two halves are not and cannot be in of themselves.

Well, "nothingness" isn't quite accurate either but it's close enough, that's part of the illusion, the mind thinks it understands it's "nothingness". It's just the paradox that we will take on this journey with a destination which cannot be charted because all we can conceive of is merely a reflection of what we think we know and can understand. So in calling it "nothingness" it is just another concept that our minds think we can understand and search for it with. The reason I say this is because while the concept of "nothingness" may be useful to sort out some of the confusion when observing from a more dense "physical substrate", as you called it, eventually to continue on the journey with no destination we have to abandon all concepts in the mind...even the ones that have served us well. There is a reason so many fruitlessly seek enlightenment with thoughts of nothingness in their head, they refuse to give up the attachment to the notion that their minds have perceived it accurately.

Oh, it's the "leftists" who instigated it you say? Have 'rightists' played no part in it? Do you have any solutions you can offer or were you only going to air your political gripes?

I don't even really like to use the term nonduality because it implies that duality exists as some basis to contrast which forms another duality in mistaken perception through the premise.

@alyra That duality you speak of you called it a belief, though it's not a reality, there is no duality. So it's a belief that would be transcended, not a duality, which would make no sense to tell others it exists just to transcend, when it really doesn't.

@Revolutionary Think That response was merely a reflection to a specific reply so the poster could possibly see the nature of it. Of the person acting that way I see someone in pain very much like everyone who identifies with their pain and creates the self caused suffering carried on with d an ideology built to justify their self suffering. It may be an extreme version of it but it is no different than what we all can experience if our self suffering manifests unchecked. It is the very same method we all use to justify our self induced suffering and while it can produce hatred of others it also is the source of what can also become the depression of the thread topic in so many even if it isn't so outwardly offensive. With depression it may be a hatred of oneself or one's life or a helplessness but just like that man it's a pain, that the self continues to suffer with. Of course that isn't the chemically caused depression which is another matter altogether, that isn't a self induced suffering.

Do you think it's healthy that you find happiness in others misery?

You keep focusing on all the externalized opinion "sides" but are failing to recognize the source of the anger, hatred and hurtful behavior, the in "side". No, I don't need to understand their opinion "side" but each one of us understanding our own in "side" is how we will cease building up and expressing the type of emotions and actions that harm ourselves and others. If someone is awake and examining their self no opinion or viewpoint should foster such harmful emotions and behavior, it's that simple. Although, if is someone is asleep in ignorance of their self this is the type of stuff that it produces. Whether it's "perfectly human" or not isn't the question.

People's behavior speaks itself and is what it is, I don't "judge" anyone. You think being so attached to one's own opinion to the point that it produces this type of hatred and behavior is psychologically healthy?

I don't have to understand anyone's "side", pro or anti anything, it doesn't benefit me at all to "understand" an opinionated "side", any of them. All animosity and hatred is a product of not understanding one's self on the in "side". That's the only "side" I seek to understand, my in "side".

@Clint Eastwood What is there to understand about the other "side"? It's people extremely attached to their opinion and finding an opportunity to vent their hatred on others, it not about understanding someone's position, it's about something on the in "side" of themselves they need to understand.