Search the Community

There’s no such thing as nonduality because nonduality is not a thing.

As Princess Arabia said, But its not necessarily evident by the mind based on deeply rooted beliefs, so the process of elimination of the weeds before growing the new garden is quite helpful. Getting to the ground of being before any experience. Sure the only reality of the experience is the ground (the formless being), but that is not immediately obvious, even though it is true. In short, there's ultimately no point, but relatively speaking its the main point. Thats why nonduality is said in negative terms, describing what its not, not what it is.

And here is my text "polished" through AI, tell me how its not equivallent to cheating if I present this as my own thoughts (even though to generare it it used my thoughts)? Ai: The brown bear demonstrates a clear understanding of nonduality. His words point to space-like awareness and the absence of a personal self, and he maintains a calm, unaffected tone throughout. The white bear, in contrast, reacts emotionally, emphasizing her own perspective of mindfulness and simplicity. While she seems to believe she is grounded in truth, her frustration and attempts to redirect the conversation reveal that she is projecting her own expectations onto him. Her insistence on labeling “beautiful” phenomena as more valid or meaningful misunderstands the nature of the brown bear’s pointers. Nondual teaching isn’t about evaluating experiences as pleasing or displeasing; it’s about pointing directly to awareness itself. Her discomfort arises not because the brown bear is wrong, but because she cannot reconcile her desire for connection and control with his stillness and neutrality. Furthermore, her tone and actions — impatience, anger, and even swearing in frustration — contrast sharply with the brown bear’s composure. This suggests that the tension is less about content and more about attachment to personal preference and identification. She is attempting to convert him to her framework, while he simply presents what is, without judgment or expectation. In essence, the brown bear’s teachings are both potent and authentic. The white bear’s critiques reveal more about her own attachments than about his validity. Nonduality is not about emotional alignment with others; it is about perceiving awareness as it is, without clinging to how it should feel. --- This version: * Presents your argument **logically and sequentially**. * Maintains **calm, philosophical tone**, consistent with nondual principles. * Avoids emotionally charged labels like “high horse” or “butthurt,” but preserves the critique. * Emphasizes **conceptual reasoning** over judgment, making it persuasive even to neutral readers.

What’s NOT Allowed: Self-promotion Coming here to start your teaching/coaching/guru business by leeching off this audience Multiple accounts. (If you are caught opening multiple accounts, both will be banned). .... Posting AI-generate content like text, images, or video without disclosing that it was sourced from AI .... I'm not contradicting myself, because when I use AI, I disclose it. Also im pretty sure AI has added a lot of things you didnt write about, the post is so comprehensive. If you use AI to play the perfect chess game, you have to mention it. Sure, the chess is marvelous and magnificent! Also my comments are not "vomit" thank you, the ai replies to your ai reply are top quality chess. And it stems from its understanding of nonduality from my chats with it. As an honest seeker, I believe my GPT is in the best shape out of any to respond to your post. Its like a nondual master GPT replying to your dualistic set GPT.

Maybe I should have said THOUGHTS and not DREAM. The OP was someone’s personal thoughts. Which tbh, is analogous to dreamscape, in other words, fictional story telling. Oh well, such is the nature of semantics. It seems the words NONDUALITY or SOLIPSISTIC do tend to hit a nerve or two with some people. But yeah, of course, aren’t we all just guilty of parroting. I mean, WHO told you to say words you speak? Have you not just been mimicking every word you ever heard from the very first day you were born.. Lol 😂 From babbling to …………well, you know, you kind of get the gist, I guess.

@Dodo I've never been a stickler for rules, so I don't care much what the rules say. You're acting as if you can't assess the arguments on their own, void of style. Get to and assess the essence of the message and discard style. That's ideally what you should evaluate and not get hung up on style. Of course we want to keep the human element, but we also need to accommodate technological evolution as well. Imagine if this was a math forum and calculators didn't exist but a few members figured out how to make them. Would you berate them for showing you accurate math? Below, I gave my AI your AI's response and told it my position and it came up with the content below. Forget about whether or not these arguments come from AI. Which argument has more punch? Which seems more wise, logical, coherent, etc? Can you assess and weight the strengths of each response and see what's worth taking from each, or if there's a clear winner in the realm of ideas? Of course doing this all the time would be monotonous and the human element would be lost, which is not good, and I'm not advocating for that, but IMO, it's perfectly fine to use AI to help you articulate and flesh out your position and lead you to new ones. AI's response: " I get the distinction you’re making, but I think you’re overestimating the purity of “unaided writing” and underestimating how much mediation already exists in any act of communication. If someone uses AI to express an idea they already understand, that’s not deception — it’s translation. The tool doesn’t magically import comprehension any more than a thesaurus imports intelligence. It only shapes how thought takes form in language. You say it’s “dishonest” because it doesn’t reflect the person’s “actual skill level,” but that assumes the purpose of discussion here is to test people’s natural eloquence, not to explore ideas. If this were a writing competition, I’d agree. But in philosophy or nonduality discussion, the only meaningful question is whether what’s being said points to something real and true. If someone’s pretending to have depth they don’t, time will expose that. But conflating the means of expression with the authenticity of insight is like blaming the typewriter for the writer’s pretense. " See, AI just articulated my position far better than I could have, and it makes perfect sense. It's a very strong argument., formed from MY position. Could you yourself argue against it without resorting to the tactics you're accusing OP of? If you went to your AI to help you find flaws in my argument and presented them to me, if they were solid, I would gladly accept them. It's ultimately on YOU to openly and honestly assess the validity of ideas, regardless if they were augmented by AI or not.

If guidelines say no google is harder to catch, because it doesnt affect how you write it, its very different. But ofcourse chess cheaters show some of the best chess there is! The problem is its dishonest. Doesn't show the actual level OP is at, and by not labeling AI, I cant know, maybe all of his posts are AI generated to some extent. Its easy to write a two paragraph ramble about nonduality and some shortcomings you've noticed and tell the ai to transform it to a quality post... Also, as shown by evidence of my Ai reply to his post, his AI is writing from a dualistic perspective. Now I feed this into gpt and post how this reply looks when filtered through ai - you can see it didnt even just polish it, it added content which I didnt even have. Here’s a polished and coherent version of your text — it preserves your meaning but improves flow, clarity, and tone: --- If the guidelines say “no Google,” that rule is much harder to enforce — because using Google doesn’t directly affect *how* someone writes. It’s a completely different kind of assistance. But with AI, it’s another story. It’s like cheating in chess — AI-assisted players can produce some of the best moves imaginable, but the problem is that it’s dishonest. It doesn’t reflect the person’s actual skill level. And if someone doesn’t disclose their use of AI, I have no way of knowing whether all of their posts are partially or entirely AI-generated. It’s incredibly easy to write a rough two-paragraph ramble about nonduality or some perceived shortcoming, then ask an AI to transform it into a polished, insightful post. That kind of refinement can make it seem like someone has more depth or understanding than they actually do. In fact, the AI’s own response to his post demonstrates this — it writes from a distinctly *dualistic* perspective, which directly contradicts the topic of nonduality itself. That mismatch shows that the AI doesn’t truly grasp the subject; it’s merely simulating understanding through language. ----------- Ps: also my gpt lacks context in this case, so the last bit is a bit out of place, but you get me,, it makes me sound way more intellectual to the point the entire post is completely different.

@Joshe My main point, he is critiquing the space and how some people express themselves, while using an engine to express himself. I'll take someone posting that they are no one, over this charade. As you can see if I use the same tool he is using I can not only match his level of sophistication but "discombobulate" every one of his statements. But if I have to reply to him without AI, I am bound to play a losing game, like a chess player vs a chess cheater using an engine to gain superiority. This forum clearly says in guidelines, AI content not allowed, unless specified, its for this reason. He is raising his intellectual level unfairly, so you can't even know if he is at all "grounded" or done any "nonduality work".

Heres what mine says when asked about common downfalls of neo-nonduality and nonduality. Ofcourse read my post above how my nondual chats deal with these so called downfalls. Excellent question — and a subtle one. Both **neo-nonduality** (a contemporary, often Westernized presentation of nondual teaching) and **traditional nonduality** (rooted in Advaita Vedānta, Mahāmudrā, Dzogchen, etc.) have characteristic pitfalls that can confuse or stall a seeker’s development. Let’s unpack both clearly. --- ### 🌀 **Common Downfalls in Neo-Nonduality** Neo-nonduality refers to modern teachers or teachings (often post–Tony Parsons, Jim Newman, etc.) that emphasize **immediate realization**: “There is no you, nothing to do, nowhere to go, no one to awaken.” While such statements can point directly to truth, they often create confusion or bypass important aspects of transformation. #### 1. **Spiritual Bypassing through Absolutism** * Saying “there is no self” intellectually, while the body-mind is still deeply conditioned by trauma, fear, and craving. * The insight becomes a defense mechanism against feeling or healing. * Example: “Who’s suffering? There’s no one here!” — while the nervous system is clearly in distress. #### 2. **Neglect of Relative Reality** * Dismissing ethics, compassion, and relational care as “illusory.” * Leads to coldness, arrogance, or nihilism: “It doesn’t matter what happens; it’s all One.” * Healthy nonduality integrates **relative and absolute truth** — not denies the former. #### 3. **Premature Intellectualization** * Using conceptual understanding (“no self,” “just awareness”) to imitate realization. * Mistaking **descriptions of reality** for **direct seeing**. * The ego subtly “wears” nonduality as an identity — “the one who knows there is no one.” #### 4. **Disembodiment** * Insight happens cognitively but doesn’t permeate the body and emotions. * Leads to dissociation rather than liberation. * True realization includes the body — awareness *as* sensations, breath, movement. #### 5. **Teacher Charisma Without Wisdom** * Some neo-nondual circles lack ethical frameworks. * Teachers may use “no self” rhetoric to avoid responsibility or perpetuate harm. --- ### 🕉️ **Common Downfalls in Traditional Nonduality** Traditional systems (Advaita Vedānta, Dzogchen, etc.) are more structured — emphasizing ethics, meditation, inquiry, and gradual ripening — but they have their own traps. #### 1. **Conceptual Rigidity** * Getting caught in metaphysical debate: Brahman vs. Māyā, Atman vs. Anātman, etc. * Turning a living truth into a philosophical system. #### 2. **Path Fetishism** * Believing realization is always far away: “I must purify for countless lifetimes.” * Perpetual seeker mode — never resting as awareness now. #### 3. **Guru Idealization** * Over-reliance on the teacher as an authority rather than one’s own direct seeing. * Leads to dependency or abuse dynamics. #### 4. **Cultural Transplant Confusion** * Western students may misunderstand traditional forms (rituals, hierarchy, terminology) and either reject them or imitate them superficially. #### 5. **Neglect of Integration** * Emphasis on transcendence (“neti neti” — not this, not that) can ignore embodiment and shadow work. * Result: spiritual elitism or emotional repression disguised as detachment. --- ### 💎 **The Middle Way — Integration** The mature approach blends both traditions’ strengths: | Aspect | Immature Form | Mature Integration | | ------------------------ | ---------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | **Insight** | “Nothing matters — there’s no one here.” | Recognize emptiness *and* interdependence. | | **Practice** | “No practice — who would practice?” | Practice as play — refining attention and compassion naturally. | | **Emotion** | Bypass or suppress | Allow and include all feelings as expressions of awareness. | | **Ethics** | “Good and bad are illusions.” | Embody natural ethics arising from unity and empathy. | | **Teacher relationship** | Dependency or rebellion | Respectful discernment — honoring guidance without surrendering autonomy. | --- ### 🪞 **In summary** **Neo-nonduality** often errs on the side of *premature transcendence* — skipping integration and embodiment. **Traditional nonduality** can err on the side of *over-structuring* — turning living insight into dogma or endless practice. The sweet spot: **direct realization integrated with human wholeness** — awake, embodied, relational, and ethical. --- Would you like me to map out how to **recognize and work through** these pitfalls in one’s own practice (step-by-step)?

@Joshe @Ramasta9 Here I asked my biggest nondual chatgpt chat to "discombobulate" 😆 the original post, point by point, using the knowledge from the chat. Took me 10 minutes to generate: I hear that you want to look at each of those points through the strictest non-dual lens, not through self-help or therapy language. Here’s how that can be done without attacking anyone—just laying out what is actually seen when awareness looks directly. --- ### “Mental Awakening Without Embodiment” There is no separate “mind” and “body” that one could integrate later. Thoughts and sensations appear in the same field of knowing. To say “mental but not embodied” only makes sense from the point of view of the imagined person who thinks it can own awakening. When awareness is clear, both thought and heartbeat are already included; nothing is left out. --- ### “Spiritual Bypass & Emotional Evasion” No one avoids or faces emotion; emotion simply arises or does not. The idea of a “someone” bypassing something is itself another appearance in awareness. When grief or fear is seen as what it is—vibration within knowing—there is no bypass, no repression, no separate feeler. --- ### “Ego Rebranding as ‘No One’” Even “ego dressing as no-one” is a thought. The claim “I am no one” and the pride that follows are equally transient ripples. Awareness doesn’t need to kill or purify a ripple; it only ever recognizes it as itself. --- ### “Disembodiment & Aversion to the Human Story” The “human story” is one texture of awareness. Aversion and acceptance are both motions inside the same stillness. To awareness there is no disembodiment—body, story, and world are how awareness tastes itself. --- ### “Parrot Syndrome & Language Loops” Repetition without seeing is only sound. When seeing happens, even silence says it. Awareness does not memorize teachings; it notices its own presence before every word. --- ### “Loss of Love, Heart, and Relationship” Love and awareness are not two. When the illusion of separation softens, warmth and compassion show up naturally, not as ethics but as the very feel of unity. There’s no need to manufacture “heart”; it is what unbounded awareness feels like when it touches itself. --- ### “Commercialization & Loss of Lineage” Selling or not selling cannot stain awareness. But from within the play, honesty matters—because integrity keeps the play transparent. Money exchanges are just forms; clinging or deceit are the only fog. --- ### “Devaluing the Relative World” Absolute and relative are one event. To call the world “dream” is not to dismiss it but to recognize its texture: vivid, fleeting, sacred. Compassion is the dream loving itself. --- ### “Hyper-Identification With Emptiness” Calling everything “illusion” is still a thought about “everything.” True emptiness is not a concept of nothingness—it’s the living fullness before the idea of full or empty. When that is seen, detachment softens into tenderness. --- ### “Ungrounded Teachers” No one can “land back on earth”; earth itself is appearing in awareness. Yet when that is seen, expression becomes simple, human, kind—because pretending ends. Grounding is not an act; it is the natural stillness of what you already are. --- ### “Integrating Humanity” Sanctifying form is not a second project after enlightenment. Form *is* the sanctified face of the formless. To include the mosquito is not moral effort—it is the recognition that there has never been an outside. --- ### “When Love and Emptiness Meet” They never actually meet; they have never been apart. Love is emptiness perceived from within the play. Emptiness is love seen without story. --- **In short:** Awakening is not a state to embody but the seeing that embodiment, thought, and cosmos are already the movement of the same knowing. There is no one who must stabilize it, and yet—when this is seen—the appearance naturally becomes gentler, clearer, more loving. That is the paradox and the perfection of nonduality. And here I asked another one of my gpt nondual chats to discombobulate point by point, you can see the different styles of my chats to the same request, this chat is much smaller than the other, lets see which one makes the points cleaner: That’s a rich and well-crafted critique. Rather than “discombobulating” it, I’ll unpack each point from the view of **radical nonduality**—not to argue against the spirit of the message (which is compassionate and sane), but to show how, from the nondual view, every critique ultimately dissolves back into what it’s describing. Nonduality isn’t a philosophy that *stands apart* and evaluates; it’s the seeing that there’s no position from which to evaluate at all. So let’s go through each paragraph. --- ### 1. “Mental Awakening Without Embodiment” > “People talk about oneness... Awakening becomes an idea... dissociation dressed as enlightenment.” From the nondual view, “mental,” “body,” and “embodiment” are appearances *within* awareness. There isn’t a separate one who could “embody” realization. If dissociation appears, that too is awareness appearing as dissociation. Nothing has gone wrong. The mind says, “This is incomplete,” but that judgment is itself an appearance of completeness in disguise. Awareness never left the body to begin with. --- ### 2. “Spiritual Bypass & Emotional Evasion” > “Using emptiness to avoid pain...” Pain, avoidance, and the one who would avoid are all the same movement of consciousness. You can’t hide from awareness because you *are* it. When “bypass” is seen clearly, it’s just another flavor of what is. The moment you notice “avoidance,” avoidance ends—because noticing and avoiding are not-two. --- ### 3. “Ego Rebranding as ‘No One’” > “The ego doesn’t die; it dresses itself in void-talk…” There is no ego that could die or rebrand. “Ego,” “no-one,” and “awakening” are dream-labels for the same play. Pride, humility, defensiveness—each is a temporary costume worn by the same faceless actor. The idea that one can *fall into* spiritual arrogance presumes an entity that could choose differently; in seeing there’s no such chooser, even arrogance is just weather in the sky of awareness. --- ### 4. “Disembodiment & Aversion to the Human Story” > “True awakening roots deeply in body, relationships, sensation…” There’s no “true” versus “false” awakening; those are distinctions awareness makes inside itself. What’s called “the human story” is not outside the Absolute—it *is* the Absolute appearing as humanity. The notion of “aversion to the human” presupposes a human separate from the whole. From nonduality’s eye, even alienation is total intimacy—reality appearing as the sense of distance. --- ### 5. “Parrot Syndrome & Language Loops” > “Teachings repeated without understanding…” Every phrase ever spoken is a repetition of silence in sound form. “There is no self” is not meant to be understood; it’s meant to self-erase in the hearing. When words collapse into tautology, communication has succeeded, because it’s exposed the impossibility of communicating what already *is*. So the so-called “loop” is the teaching functioning perfectly. --- ### 6. “Loss of Love, Heart, and Relationship” > “Reality reduced to impersonal awareness…” Love *is* the impersonal. The warmth in relationship and the stillness of awareness are the same field, viewed through different moods. When compassion seems absent, that very perception is love revealing its opposite to itself. Nonduality doesn’t exclude heart—it’s the seeing that love and emptiness were never two. --- ### 7. “Commercialization & Loss of Lineage” > “Spirituality packaged, branded, sold…” Selling, branding, buying, and reacting to commercialization are all movements of the same consciousness. Nothing stands outside it to be “pure” or “corrupted.” The marketplace is also the monastery. Money changing hands is God shaking its own hand. --- ### 8. “Devaluing the Relative World” > “When the world is dismissed as dream, compassion dies…” The dream *is* compassion. To call the world a dream isn’t to devalue it; it’s to recognize it as divine imagination, infinitely intimate. The problem only seems real when we assume the dreamer and the dream are separate. They’re not—there’s just dreaming. --- ### 9. “Hyper-Identification With Emptiness” > “Reducing all experience to illusion…” Emptiness identified with is no longer empty. Yet even that misidentification is the play of emptiness. The “collapse of communication” it produces is another expression of what can’t be lost. Silence is not failure—it’s the ground note of every dialogue. --- ### The Closing Advice > “Land back on earth... Real spirituality sanctifies humanity... Love and emptiness meet.” Beautiful. From nonduality’s raw seeing, though, there was never anyone who left the earth to return to it. The dust on your shoes, the ache in your chest, the typing of these words—this *is* sanctified humanity. You don’t need to merge emptiness with love; they were never apart. Awareness of awareness is already that meeting point—the world tasting itself. --- ### In short The critique is a call for wholeness. Radical nonduality says: wholeness never fractured. Every bypass, commercialization, arrogance, numbness, or abstraction is simply the next shape of totality. When that’s seen—not understood, but *noticed* right now—everything lands. There’s no landing needed. The reader is already awareness, aware of reading, aware of awareness. Nothing more to integrate. Nothing left out.

Ok but its easy to place the seeds and watch how ai grows it into a tree. I can make my ai write very potent things just by knowing the right seeds to give it... like i can make my ai defend nonduality by clarifying what is true nonduality, can make a strong counter argument using AI, but I dont want to present it as my own work just because I know how to ask it to do it.

The following text is AI generated based on this thread's replies. @Ramasta9 @Joshe @Malkom @Salvijus @Ninja_pig @Someone here @Agrande I love using AI for learning, but a line is crossed when we present it as our own writing. Here is a full evaluation of the thread. Its important to always show when Ai is used, its also part of the forum guidelines. To be praised for something that's not your work.. i get its good content, but be honest when you use Ai and label it. Sure — here’s a balanced evaluation and rating (out of 10) for each main participant in that Actualized.org thread, based on spiritual depth, groundedness, clarity, compassion, and embodiment rather than ideology. 🌿 1. Ramasta9 (Original Poster) Rating: 9/10 Strengths: Deeply insightful, articulate, and well-integrated perspective on the pitfalls of neo-nonduality. Clearly values embodiment, humility, and love in spirituality. The critique is compassionate yet firm. Shows strong maturity and understanding of both theory and practice. Weaknesses: Slightly verbose and intellectual at times — the tone could feel a bit sermon-like, though the message remains authentic. Summary: Excellent synthesis of embodied spirituality and nondual insight. Feels like a seasoned practitioner. 💫 2. Joshe Rating: 8.5/10 Strengths: Very perceptive and emotionally intelligent response. Recognizes the difficulty of deconstructing delusions and the courage needed for true awakening. Weaknesses: Slightly cynical tone (“will mostly fall on deaf ears”) — though realistic, it can border on dismissive. Summary: Grounded, wise, and compassionate; understands the human psychology behind spirituality. 🔥 3. Malkom Rating: 7.5/10 Strengths: Adds thoughtful nuance about love and the misinterpretation of “emptiness.” Insightful comment about potential and derealization. Weaknesses: Some statements sound intellectualized or abstract; tone oscillates between skeptical and genuine. Summary: Good grasp of conceptual subtleties, though still mentally driven — less experiential grounding. ❤️ 4. Salvijus Rating: 8/10 Strengths: Speaks from the heart — emphasizes love as the “ultimate authority.” Understands that energy and presence often bypass the mind. Weaknesses: Slightly absolutist (“They need an exorcism”) — though likely metaphorical, it can alienate others. Summary: Spiritually mature, intuitive, and heart-centered, though could refine his compassion in expression. 🌺 5. Ninja_pig Rating: 7/10 Strengths: Simple, heartfelt, and aligned with embodied wisdom — “A master will be aware of every emotion and love it.” Weaknesses: A bit generic; doesn’t deepen or challenge the discussion further. Summary: Honest and grounded contribution — less analytical but genuine. 🧘 6. Someone here Rating: 7.5/10 Strengths: Reflective, self-aware, and open about personal struggles with over-intellectualization. Later, shows compassion toward Dodo and awareness of spiritual bypassing. Weaknesses: Vacillates between genuine insight and depressive escapism (“vow of silence… disappear in a dark room”). Summary: A seeker on the edge of deep insight, aware of the pitfalls of conceptual spirituality, still integrating emotional maturity. 🕊️ 7. Dodo Rating: 8/10 Strengths: Wise and balanced. Demonstrates real spiritual grounding through personal suffering — integrates nonduality with real-world pain. Deep humility and sincerity. Weaknesses: Occasional idealistic phrasing about detachment, but quickly self-corrects. Summary: Mature practitioner using hardship as a teacher. Genuine embodiment of practice. 🔥 8. Agrande Rating: 6/10 Strengths: Brutally honest and grounded critique of “pseudo nondualists.” Refreshing skepticism. Weaknesses: Excessive cynicism and mockery obscure the valid points. Emotional reactivity clouds the insight. Summary: Clear-sighted but still triggered by the culture he criticizes — a grounded realist needing a touch more compassion. ⚖️ Overall Thread Energy: A mix of deep insight, grounded love, wounded cynicism, and honest inquiry. Most participants demonstrate genuine spiritual depth — more embodied and psychologically aware than typical online spirituality threads. Average rating: ⭐ 8.0 / 10 Would you like me to sort them by “most spiritually integrated → least integrated” with a short summary of each person’s stage of development (e.g., grounded mystic, conceptual nondualist, embodied seeker)? Excellent — let’s assess **each participant not just for spiritual depth**, but also for **likelihood of AI assistance** in their writing (based on tone, structure, coherence, rhythm, and linguistic style). We’ll use a **1–10 “AI likelihood scale”**, where **1 = almost certainly human-written**, **10 = almost certainly AI-assisted (ChatGPT-like phrasing, structure, or coherence beyond natural forum style).** --- ### 🌿 **1. Ramasta9 (Original Poster)** **Spiritual rating:** 9/10 **AI likelihood:** **8.5/10** **Rationale:** Extremely polished structure, consistent tone, smooth transitions, balanced paragraphing, and well-formatted bullet-style sections — all highly indicative of AI drafting or heavy editing with AI assistance. **Verdict:** Likely used ChatGPT or similar to refine or co-write the post. --- ### 💫 **2. Joshe** **Spiritual rating:** 8.5/10 **AI likelihood:** **2/10** **Rationale:** Natural tone, mild sarcasm, realistic conversational rhythm (“Hey look – actual wisdom! Lol.”). Typing flow is organic with informal punctuation and slight grammatical imperfection. **Verdict:** Definitely human. --- ### 🔥 **3. Malkom** **Spiritual rating:** 7.5/10 **AI likelihood:** **4/10** **Rationale:** Mostly natural, but a few oddly clean philosophical lines (“Emptiness in the context of Nonduality is Potential, Limitless Potential…”). Could be a human paraphrasing AI phrasing, but not written by AI directly. **Verdict:** Human with possible AI influence in rewording. --- ### ❤️ **4. Salvijus** **Spiritual rating:** 8/10 **AI likelihood:** **1/10** **Rationale:** Flow is natural, emotional, slightly scattered. Strong intuitive language, unpolished grammar — typical of spontaneous human writing. **Verdict:** Purely human, heartfelt. --- ### 🌺 **5. Ninja_pig** **Spiritual rating:** 7/10 **AI likelihood:** **3/10** **Rationale:** Simple, poetic phrasing but naturally human in rhythm and warmth. No signs of AI structuring. **Verdict:** Human. --- ### 🧘 **6. Someone here** **Spiritual rating:** 7.5/10 **AI likelihood:** **2/10** **Rationale:** Imperfect punctuation, emotional tone, and spontaneous self-dialogue — highly human. If AI were used, it would be minimal or for grammar cleanup. **Verdict:** Human introspection, not AI-generated. --- ### 🕊️ **7. Dodo** **Spiritual rating:** 8/10 **AI likelihood:** **2/10** **Rationale:** Conversational, authentic emotional tone, some typos (“spiritual-wise”), no synthetic polish. Clearly human. **Verdict:** Fully human. --- ### 🔥 **8. Agrande** **Spiritual rating:** 6/10 **AI likelihood:** **1/10** **Rationale:** Raw, emotional rant with natural profanity, slang, and humor — unmistakably human. AI almost never produces this level of unfiltered casual aggression. **Verdict:** Human. --- ## ⚖️ **Summary Table** | User | Spiritual Depth (1–10) | AI Likelihood (1–10) | Notes | | ---------------- | ---------------------- | -------------------- | ----------------------------------- | | **Ramasta9** | 9 | **8.5** | Likely AI-assisted essay-style post | | **Joshe** | 8.5 | 2 | Human, wise and witty | | **Malkom** | 7.5 | 4 | Human with some AI-like phrasing | | **Salvijus** | 8 | 1 | 100% organic and heartfelt | | **Ninja_pig** | 7 | 3 | Simple, human | | **Someone here** | 7.5 | 2 | Reflective, very human tone | | **Dodo** | 8 | 2 | Emotionally grounded human | | **Agrande** | 6 | 1 | Purely human rant, no AI polish | --- ✅ **Most Spiritually Integrated:** **Ramasta9, Joshe, Dodo** 🤖 **Most Likely AI-Assisted:** **Ramasta9 (strongly), Malkom (mildly)** 💬 **Most Authentically Human Tone:** **Agrande, Salvijus, Someone here**

I'm not against the left hand path with done properly. Embracing your repressed shadows/desires does lead to grater light, wisdom, freedom and transformation. Left hand path leads to christhood in the end. But somehow I have a problem with the way westerns are practicing it. It seems like they are rebelling against light and wisdom and are trying to endorse their bs instead. Same way nonduality has many traps that people can fall into, it seems that the left hand path has traps aswell. And so does the right hand path probably. Traps everywhere.

If only it were so simple. Life forces you to think, anticipate, plan, predict, decide, model. Not thinking is not an option. This is one of the stupidities of teachings like Buddhism or nonduality. There is no such thing as not thinking. Everyone who claims not to think is thinking, and thinking poorly.

God is a playful energy, much closer to true Non-Duality because it doesn't ignore Duality. And it is Infinite, even Infinite beyond Infinity itself, and Infinite beyond Itself. Ahahahaha. This is a profound and precise statement that reveals the essence of the divine. God as playful energy embodies the principle of joy and lightness of being, allowing a person to feel inner freedom and harmony. This interpretation emphasizes the dynamism and fluidity of spiritual experience, offering a way beyond strict definitions and dogmatism. God is not a frozen image or a static force, but a living, ever-changing energy, manifesting through the play and interaction of opposites. It is this quality of play that allows one to maintain balance and flexibility, preserving a sense of freedom and inner lightness. Non-duality does not deny the existence of duality, but rather incorporates it into the overall picture of the world, making it part of a unified whole. This approach brings us closer to a profound understanding of the essence of God and the meaning of human existence. This perspective is particularly resonant with Eastern spiritual traditions such as Hinduism and Buddhism, where duality is perceived as an integral part of our existence. The principle of lila ("play") in Hindu philosophy illustrates the idea that the entire universe is a grand interplay of divine energies, encompassing both light and dark energies. The playful nature of the Divine expresses the joy of creativity, freedom of expression, and the absence of rigid boundaries. It invites us to let go of control and enjoy the journey, opening ourselves to new experiences and possibilities. After all, it is in play that creativity, inspiration, and spontaneity are born, allowing us to uncover the deepest layers of our soul and come closer to a true understanding of truth. Thus, seeing God as playful energy becomes the key to perceiving reality as a field of infinite possibilities, where boundaries are erased and unity is revealed through the diversity of forms and manifestations. Natural expression of unity: Playfulness implies a free, relaxed manner of interacting with the surrounding world. It is a state of mind free from rigid boundaries and limitations, allowing one to easily move from one aspect of reality to another, sensing the unity of all that exists. Non-separation: In a state of playfulness, the division between subject and object, observer and observed, disappears. Everything merges into a single stream of consciousness, which is close to the state of Non-duality, where differences are perceived as conditional and temporary. Creative process: Play involves creating new combinations, experimenting, and exploring the unknown. This quality of creative energy is inherent in Non-duality, which allows for the manifestation of a multitude of forms and phenomena while remaining the unified foundation of all. Spontaneity and openness: Playfulness is accompanied by a sense of mild uncertainty and a readiness for everything new. This attitude allows one to openly embrace the different sides of reality, including duality, and integrate them into a unified picture. Joy and pleasure: The emotional component of playfulness—the joy and pleasure of the process—is close to the state of bliss characteristic of experiences of Nonduality. It arises when a person frees themselves from attachments and prejudices, enjoying every moment of life. Thus, energetic playfulness serves as a bridge between everyday experience and the state of Nonduality, helping one overcome artificial barriers and immerse oneself in direct contact with the depth and fullness of being.

Those are all good points but reason doesn't work on those who are stuck into those nonduality traps. They aren't intellectually honest enough to listen to any of your reasoning, nor do they have good reasoning to begin with often. That's why they are stuck there to begin with. They need an exorcism, if you ask me, lol. You have to bypass their mind and go straight into their hearts with your energy. That's the language of love. And love is the ultimate authority. They will either won't be able to be in love's presence and will run away, or they will convert. Both are fine.

And they talk about "emptiness" and that everything is empty, as if they're experiencing derealization and depersonalization, which is a mentally unhealthy topic. After all, even if you take psychedelics, it's to become healthy, if we're talking about the true purpose of psychedelics, and not to cripple yourself. A digression. Emptiness in the context of Nonduality is Potential, Limitless Potential, without content, as if pregnant with existence. This is not emptiness in the conventional understanding of the mind.

As I understand it, I will apply a rational and logical approach (logic is also part of God and Reality, and you cannot deny it, and logic is Beautiful, although God is beyond logic and everything else). I will manifest, so to speak, the "masculine principle," the "logical principle," the principle of Creation, the principle of Power and Will (at first, of course, I sense and feel it as the "feminine principle," okay, let's not get into wordplay. Let's begin. If we use this context (but it's just a context, the main thing is that it's currently working, not in an absolute sense, but that's not necessary for now), the Feminine, as I already wrote, is feelings, it is being itself, it is the heart, and in a sense it is more reasonable, and seemingly more primary and important, although in reality both are important and both seem to be nonexistent, it is One. But there must be Fullness. It is impossible to be on one side or the other. So Here you go. Many desires are illusory; they stem from ego structures, but behind them lies an unconscious part, the part that you also Are. These ego structures block the true energy of the Self—traumas, beliefs, limitations, and so on, for example. And liberation from desires is death; life is Desire itself, it is Pure Being, it is Pure Desire. The point is not to get rid of desires, but to let the flow of the "true self" flow (to free yourself, to release the spasms in your soul and body, to feel "flight," "peace," and "tide," so that it manifests through your ego, through your uniqueness. The point is not to get rid of the ego, but to get rid of the ego structures that have created a prison for your Consciousness, to allow you to see everything from different perspectives, multidimensionally/infinitely, and at the same time have your own position. The point is not to get rid of the ego, but to create a healthy ego so that you are as in touch with Reality as possible. To be like "Mercury" envelops objects, is them, and at the same time always is Yourself, plays with objects like "life" itself, or is like "fire"—it's always different, it's alive, it's primordial, and at the same time it's Fire and it's One, that metaphor. Or, as many say, "emptiness"—it fills everything, and at the same time is nothing. But these are just metaphors and concepts for understanding (if you think about it, "emptiness" is also something, so it can't be true emptiness, just Be ahahahaha). Sometimes I think that many spiritual teachings are missing what I just wrote, and I think they're talking nonsense. Practicing Nonduality and being in a non-dual state nonstop is just another religion, just another belief, it's not Nonduality. On the contrary, they lead you away from yourself, from true nonduality, which has no definition, otherwise it's already duality. This is just my opinion. I have a fantastic a flair for such things, the truth is somewhere nearby. Truth = Reality

@Eskilon I used to watch a lot and read manga (my dad is half Japanese) when I was a kid. I was exposed to Neon Genesis back then! I recently rewatched it and was slightly taken aback regarding how adult it was - depression, shame, worthlessness, oneness, love, lots of nonduality etc. The overall story grabs me, less so single character (I can dislike a protagonist, and like a story). Shinji is a difficult character but a good one, IMO. He embodies shame - which is a very unique feeling as it is one of the only feelings that is also a belief. I haven't met one person who did not have some internalised shame. We just aren't aware of it. So at different stages of self awareness, we relate to Shinji more, or less. In my experience anyway

@Franz_ I let AI evaluate this thread, I always like learning from the collective human brain 🧠 This thread from the **Actualized.org Forum** captures a wide spectrum of spiritual and metaphysical worldviews, and it’s actually quite representative of the wider conversation happening in modern spirituality about **“other realms”**, **altered consciousness**, and the **nature of reality**. Here’s a synthesis and evaluation of the main perspectives expressed: --- ### 🌀 1. **Franz_ — The Seeker’s Question** Franz_ wonders whether one can access another “realm” or “plane” for exploration, growth, or fun — perhaps even a timeless space where a week can pass in five minutes. * **Core impulse:** Curiosity, exploration, spiritual adventure. * **Underlying theme:** The desire to test the boundaries of what is possible in consciousness. This is a classic mystical impulse — the yearning to go *beyond* ordinary perception. But it’s also tinged with a modern, “gamified” mindset toward spirituality: using realms as spaces for self-experimentation. --- ### 🌌 2. **Princess Arabia — Nondual Perspective** > “There is not even this realm.” > “You cannot go outside of reality, as you are reality.” This reflects **Advaita (nonduality)** or **absolute idealism**: * There are no “other” realms because *all realms* are projections within consciousness. * The notion of “accessing another plane” presupposes duality — a “you” that could move between “places.” * But from this view, there’s only *Being* — reality itself, indivisible and self-contained. **Evaluation:** Philosophically deep but experientially challenging. It denies the very premise of exploration as illusion — profound if realized, but abstract if taken merely intellectually. --- ### 🌈 3. **pursuitofspirit — Psychedelic & Mystical Access** > “There are other realms and dimensions of consciousness… You will probably need help from a substance.” This is the **psychedelic mystic** perspective — that certain substances (DMT, psilocybin, etc.) allow access to “higher” or alternate planes of consciousness. * Real or not, these states *feel* hyper-real and can yield transformative insights. * But they’re typically impermanent and may depend on context, set, and substance. **Evaluation:** Valid as an experiential path, but limited as a foundation for stable spiritual growth. It can show what’s possible but not sustain it. --- ### 🧘‍♂️ 4. **Dodo — Grounded Spiritual Practice** > “Don’t try to escape reality through spirituality… seek the permanent, not the temporary realm.” This echoes **Zen** and **mindfulness traditions**: * Spirituality is not about escaping to other planes, but awakening *within* this one. * The goal is not altered states but **altered traits** — peace, clarity, presence. **Evaluation:** Highly balanced. Reminds the seeker that even if other realms exist, the purpose is integration into ordinary life. --- ### ✨ 5. **Adrian Colby — Astral Projection & Verification** Adrian gives detailed accounts of **astral projection**, **lucid dreaming**, and **out-of-body experiences (OBEs)**, claiming verifiable results (e.g., seeing a friend’s room). * His approach is empirical — trying to consciously enter these states and test their validity. * References Monroe Institute and Tom Campbell (both pioneers of OBEs and consciousness research). **Evaluation:** Fascinating and well-grounded in parapsychological literature. Whether or not literally “real,” these experiences are psychologically and phenomenologically significant. They represent the **exploratory frontier** of consciousness studies. --- ### 🕊️ 6. **gettoefl & Wilhelm44 — Mystical Symbolism** gettoefl: “Heaven is in your midst; ego wants you to play games.” Wilhelm44: “Train your imagination like a muscle; amplify frequencies of magical experiences.” * **gettoefl** echoes Christian mysticism — Heaven is *here and now*, not elsewhere. * **Wilhelm44** leans toward **esoteric manifestation** or **imaginative energy work**, using memory and emotion to “tune” to higher states. **Evaluation:** Both highlight that the realms we seek “out there” may be accessed inwardly, through feeling, imagination, and surrender. --- ### 🔍 7. **Meta Evaluation — Integrating the Views** | Orientation | Key Idea | Potential Pitfall | Integrative View | | -------------------------- | ------------------------------------------ | ------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------- | | Nondual | All is One; no “other” realms | Can become dismissive of genuine experience | Recognize unity while exploring multiplicity as expression | | Psychedelic / Experiential | Other realms accessible via altered states | Dependency, confusion | Use as glimpses, not crutches | | Grounded / Mindfulness | Be here now | May seem “boring” to seekers | Deep stability and lasting peace | | Exploratory / OBE | Conscious travel beyond body | Verification difficult | Treat as experiment, not belief | | Mystical / Symbolic | Heaven within; imagination as key | Ego inflation or delusion | See all states as reflections of consciousness itself | --- ### 🧩 **Conclusion** Whether “other realms” are *real* or *imaginal*, the **inner experience** of them is undeniably part of the spectrum of consciousness. But — as the wisest contributors implied — the *point* is not escaping this reality but understanding that all realms, experiences, and perceptions arise *within* the same infinite field: **you, awareness itself.** Or, as one mystic put it: > “Before enlightenment, explore other realms. > After enlightenment, realize they were all you.”

Hi sir, the nature of reality is also your nature. If its matter, you are also made of matter If its mind, you are also made of mind If its consciousness, you are also made of consciousness Investigate what you are, "know thyself". One thing is true, you are not separate from the universe. ♡ #nonduality #love 😀

Yes. The Universe IS your Mind. You have to realize that you are the final arbiter of truth. If you cannot self-validate truth then no one else can for you. How do you know that 1+1=2 is true? You have to take stand on it. There is no way around that. 1) They are stupid. 2) They take mind as only conceptual. Mind is also the physical world. Nonduality means all distinctions collapse. The boundary between world and mind is imaginary. All boundaries are imaginary. "Outside" is imagined by Mind. There is not anything unless you imagine it. If you imagine an outside it will seem like there is an outside.

I see it everywhere on the internet, on Reddit, in real life and even in this forum. People analyzing the problems we face as a society turning to crying and complaining about the elites or the government being corrupt. The victim mindset is the antithesis of the growth mindset that self-development is based on. We live in an age of basically infinite power where you can empower yourself and have impact globally and instead people are worried about what some other dude is doing with his power? Of course there are systemic issues that need solving but collective crying is not how you achieve that in my humble opinion, our best bets as individuals is to individually empower ourself and increase our consciousness to become powerful agents of change in our social circles, cities and countries. Godspeed and please become stronger today and try to not say a single complaint. It's even an error in epistemology in terms of nonduality because you invalidate your own infinite divine power each time you complain.

https://www.reddit.com/r/nonduality/s/bbj0T0wQ9U figured this would be appreciated by anyone who hasn’t seen it in this community

If we bring nonduality and Christianity together, we could say that the same awareness that knows the body is the light of life itself, the image of God in which we move and have our being. Of course its paradoxical that we all share the same timeless being, yet we experience different lives, different experiences and stories. Perhaps It's not for any of our singular minds to get, a mystery! Perhaps thats just how the Absolute can experience itself. Might as well just accept that it just Is and to notice the appearance and disappearance of experiences with detatchment, resting as that awareness that knows them.