eputkonen

Enlightenment is the shattering of the illusion of duality and idea of "me". As the idea of "me" is shattered, it is figuratively called the death of "me". Physical death has nothing to do with enlightenment. Mental death is a closer pointer...the mentally created "me".

I will try to answer from my own experience. I awoke in 2005. A bit more than a year later I met a woman that I started dating. Why? I had experienced being single mostly up until that point and thought it would be fun to experience being in a long term relationship. Playing single or married are both good options, but each has its own kind of fun. About three years after meeting, we were married. Why? I thought continuing the game of being in a relationship would be fun; and I knew getting married was something she wanted and it would make her happy. Also, I thought it might be fun to experience the whole getting married thing...ceremony, honeymoon, etc. It was a blast. We have been together for over 10 years now. As Samra said, I have found a fantastic teammate. She has introduced me to things I would have never discovered or experienced alone. It has been enjoyable playing being married. The being married game will end one day...that is inevitable. So I am not attached to being married or my wife, but I will enjoy the time I do have.

Acceptance is still an egoic action. Something to counter the current action of resisting and denying what-is. Why not just cease resisting and denying what-is...and the present is automatically accepted?

Cease resisting and denying what-is...and appreciate what-is as it is...then life becomes quite enjoyable (regardless of circumstances). Or said another way, happiness is what we are when we are not making ourselves miserable. Just cease creating your own miseries. One way to cease creating your own miseries is to consciously see how you are doing it to yourself and cease doing that.

That is not nondual...in your conceptionalizing of what you heard, you are now imagining infinite variations of duality. Also, it is still revolving around a "you" that is experiencing these infinite variations. There is no "me" in nonduality.

@Sage_Elias , my 2 cents...hair or the lack of hair does not matter. No spiritual significance. But as Natasha said, it does simplify things to shave your head.

I am this or that is thought. But thought started with the "I". There is only AM...verifiable by present moment experience.

I wrote a blog post about this very thing - http://www.engagednonduality.com/what-does-we-are-all-one-really-mean/ My understanding is that you and I are literally not two. Not two is the direct meaning of nonduality.

Because it's fun and interesting...for the joy of it. Just something to play with.

@TheSomeBody my daily practice (currently) is what I call SOAK. Softness, Openness, Appreciation, and Kindness...that is what I practice throughout the day. Being softer (speech and such), more open (vulnerable...no defenses or walls)...appreciating all that is...and being kind to myself and others.

Either you are free of suffering or you are not...you are deceiving yourself if suffering does not arise only if you can continue to do something.

I've called it a certainty of life...

Generically, I think the biggest obstacle towards realizing your true nature for most people is the belief that it is will be "you" who will realize your true nature.

I tried to explain it in about 5 minutes:

What goes away was never yours to begin with. Besides, realization is not about memory or thought...but deeper than that, understanding in one's being.

The Self is eternal and infinite, but it is not personal...there is no "me" in it. This 'no "me" in it' is why the Buddha started teaching no-self...because people were attaching to the Self as a "me" that will continue forever and trying to identify with it. He wanted to break that attachment, identification, and belief in a continuing "me". The terms are not really contradictory, but pointers from different angles towards the same point. Another way to put it....'what-is' is not Atman, nor anatman, nor both, nor neither. These are just terms and concepts we are applying...usually through second-hand knowledge and second-hand understanding. From my understanding...after seeing through the "me"...either pointer is an acceptable pointer. Self or no-self.

One really can't expect to be appreciated...the delusion is that you deserve and are owed appreciation. I appreciate my parents and I love my parents, but I did not appreciate them in the past...and so I don't expect my daughter to appreciate or love me. I love my daughter and it is not conditional on whether she loves or appreciates me. Unconditional love has no expectations of the other. Appreciation does not imply distance...appreciation implies connection and being valued. Really, true love does not exist without appreciation - to feel that the world and life is better with them in it. Love also needs acceptance of who they are. Love also needs allowing them to be who they are. I said this in reverse though, because each builds on the other really. Allowing...accepting...appreciating...loving. One can allow, but not accept. One can accept, but not appreciate. One can appreciate, but not love. However, it is impossible to truly love another if they are not allowed to be who they are, accepted as they are, and appreciated for who/what they are. You called parental love...natural and genuine...but some parents do not accept their children. This taints love and really destroys it.

@Arkandeus , gratefulness does imply a debt. Actually, in Japanese...there are various ways to say "thank you" and each imply various levels of indebtedness. Also, gratitude seemed to me to be a bit past oriented. Really, I think the wrong word is being used. Forget gratefulness, just appreciate. You can appreciate a painting...it's concept, beauty, etc. - but it is not being grateful to the painting. Appreciation also focuses on moment. Appreciation and gratitude are different. "I am done being grateful for things, as that would imply I do not deserve what I get" But you can appreciate things and whatever you get. Appreciation has no connection or relation to deserving or not deserving.

Question...is this loving and valuing the people you would call insensitive? Are you valuing those humans as well? Furthermore, you are describing egoic issues: you don't like...lowers your self esteem...they don't treat each other as you like...you loose energy...etc. That "you" is a fiction...it is only a thought you are holding onto.

Why break up with anyone? That is the action of an ego. All is related and relation...there is no way to separate. What it sounds like is you are trying to detach because you don't like this attachment to family. However, detachment is also egoic. Do not attach or detach, just be nonattached...which is all what you really are can be. Only the ego tries to hold on or push away. Awakening does not mean you cease playing games...it just means that there is understanding that it is just a game. Also, things arise in response automatically. As you walk down the street, you might pass someone who smiles and says, "hello." You smile and respond with "hello." This is the true self. It is not that there is nothing to say. There is nothing to gain or lose, but if someone says - "so, how has work been lately?" You might respond with "it is going well. I am up for a promotion." How would this be different if your father or mother asked? It wouldn't be. You say you have no interest in spending time with them, but do you have interest in spending time doing something else? If so, why the partiality? If you have no interest in whatever is done, then why not spread love and joy...and your parents will be overjoyed by occasional visits. It doesn't matter to you either way...so why not?

Love could never prevent liberation, but attachment, identification, and partiality could hinder liberation. However, it is not possible to be without attachment prior to liberation, because the "me" is attached and partial to some but not others. Liberation is seeing through the "me"...and so attachment falls away. With the falling away of attachment, that does not mean you cease or do not love parents, siblings, spouse, or kids. Love and attachment are two different things. Opposing really. In the end, the liberated have lost identification and attachment to a specific family or even country. The world becomes their family. All elders become their parents...and all juniors become their children. The attachment and identification with "my" mother and "my" father...to blood ties...imprison through a believed "me" and belief in the existence of "others" / outsiders.

Yes, enlightenment happened in 2005. I summarize here - https://youtu.be/b-_GoAQnDbs