Search the Community

It's fantastic, you've been too lazy to shoot yourself in the foot while others spend their lives with "friends" who don't like them and are mean to them, others who spend their life with a partner who is with them because he hasn't found anything better and are constantly cuckolded and despised, others who spend their life in a job they don't really like for safety etc etc. You have more effective pellets. You can't fail because there's nowhere to go, of course we can declare that being unhappy/unfulfilled is a failure but you know very well that it is not in this semantics that we invoke the notion success/failure divide. You're just afraid of letting your libido swing into its "schizoid", rebellious position. What you say in Newspeak is "Hey, I'm supposed to have a shitty life by the pressure of a nebula of injunctions registered in my subconscious, but you know what I don't/no longer have the energy because about my traumas and other stuff! Tell me how to accept having "failed" and have the energy again to pursue a shitty life to cure my ego". Note how impersonal it sounds, both in substance and in form. Ps : I'm not trying to be conscending, it's just my way of expressing myself and loving, in case it's not clear. Not matter.

Hey @Leo Gura, while @Water by the River has gone to extensive length in several posts to explain and clarify his position on what exactly Absolute Consciousness is from his pov, I see you either repeatedly refuse his take on the Absolute, or you say in general that nobody knows what Consciousness really is. Could you then please clarify and precicely state for all of us what Consciousness fundamentally is from your perspective and where this differs from saying that in full enlightenment one moves permanently from being a body/mind in an objective world to being impersonal, centerless, empty, boundless eternal infinite consciousness floating nowhere, nowhen, nohow, with all traces of seperate self arisings distinguished, with all distinctions/differences collapsed until there is only life left onto itself. In regards to the above statement, if you say to become 'more conscious', do you mean you become conscious of more/other fundamental aspects of God (like empty, eternal, boundless, centreless etc.), or do you mean with 'more conscious' that you become conscious of the exact workings/mechanics of reality itself, like for example becoming conscious how exactly you create/will the entire perceptual field into existence?

Yes. Javfly33, every being ends up with that insight after having been beaten enough by INFINITELY large and Infinitely Intelligent Reality. Every being suffers as long as all these mindsets of doing something else than trying to finding permanent bliss persist. And even in doing or prefering something else they just do something that brings bliss or peace or good emotions, even when searching ever new Awakenings n+1, or getting maximum conscious, whatever that means in the individual case). So, its just the question of a) learning by suffering by trying the 1000+1 games separate-selfs play, and seeing that they all fail in bringing permanent happiness. Takes a longer time, but is the nature of this game/lila/universe and its Raison d'Être (the Lila-Show) or b) learning by insight and going straight to the finish line, or back home to ones True Being: Full Enlightenment. The Deep Identity Shift to being the Infinite Reality itself, the one without a second, or Infinite Impersonal Consciousness. All I am trying to do is highlighting this little dynamic how the Absolute "throws" itself out into manifestation, form, the many, separate-self, and PULLS itself back home either by suffering or insight. And valueing a) higher as b), or a) being somehow spiritual superior to b). In a certain way, I am spoiling the game/Lila of a). But just look at the reactions, I am very sure I won't spoil it for too many... Water by the River

But if one can access the Absolute at will (the visual field as boundless timeless infinite nondual mere appearance), switch off the self-contraction/separate-self (and its suffering included) at will if it dares to raise its ugly head again, and STAY in that Ultimate Impersonal Reality... that says something about (to use your words) how conscious "one" is. Well, you can turn it around it all the ways you want. The fact that Ultimate Reality is not stable accessible and suffering continues is the hallmark of the psychedelic-afficionados, from all I have seen so far. How come Infinitely intelligent Reality doesn't let the psychedelic afficionado rest blissfully in True Nature? Why does suffering not stop in that case? Because Infinitely Intelligent Ultimate Reality doesn't want that (nor could it, even if "it" wanted) a not fully transcended ego/separate-self stays there blissed out and proclaims "that is the highest". IT is IMPERSONAL Infinite Consciousness. With Impersonal in bold letters. And until that is delivered by fully transcending and killing the separate-self-arisings in normal life, there is practice of transcedence and "dying to the lower identites" to be done. The suffering is what pulls a separate-self back to its True Nature, Empty Impersonal Infinite Consciousness, or Reality itself (including the manifest show in a nondual way). Honestly, if there ever has been one big warning sign dangling on top of all of that proclaimed "highest Awakeninsg n+1", it is what described in the paragraph above. Suffering continues. And Reality will make you suffer until you get that. Cruel game? Not really, no one gets left behind halfway up the mountain, in the suffering of the claws of the self-contraction of the separate-self, until that is fully transcended and gone. And going exploring the Multiverse in ever "higher" Awakenings ."Higher" into what? The Absolute can not be higher or lower, only form/manifestation/appearance/arisings WITHIN IT. So its higher Awakenings into ever more relative appearing arisings, not the Absolute. And that will just prolong that suffering. Please prove me wrong. If you don't shut down the show here, we all are in the prime seats to watch it. Anyway, bon voyage! Water by the River

Then let me have the cases which you consider fully enlightened that don't align. I will try to align them and their pointers if the pointers are about the Absolute, and the examples know what they are talking about. "Rupert Spira says that solpsism is madness. Ramana Maharshi says there are no others. Rupert Spira says consciousness is love, Ralston says love is just an emotion. " I could align that. All 4 cases know what they are talking about. Spira: Solipsism from the perspective of an unenlightened separate self is madness. From the unenlighened mindstream Solipsism is just not true, because the "I" refered to is not the Absolute, or Impersonal Infintie Consciousness, Reality itself. Ramana: From the Absolute perspective there are no others. But that needs Enlightenment, and a deep identity shift towards Infinite Impersonal Consciousness, Reality itself. If one is then inclined to talk fully from the Absolute Side of the street: No problem. Spira: Consciousness is love: Ones True Nature, Impersonal Infinite Consciousness opens the mindstream towards love and bliss, or loving all that is and arises. Very clear once enlightened. Ralston: Love an emotion in the meaning that some mindstreams show a little bit of it sometimes, others more often, the permanently enlightened mindstream needs that as basis to stay enlightened/awakened, but also produces that love as result of staying in ones nature on a consistent basis. It is a perspective on love as state that can dominate a mindstream or not. Water by the River

Yes. All there is is Suchness, or Consciousness. Nondual. "IT" is also the only consciousness "thing" that can perceive anything. Since there is only "itself" (all appearances, every world/dimension), It can only perceive "itself". Normally as an "other", not nondual. But that also means, since "it" is the only consciousness "thing" there is: "It" can only understand itself. There is nothing else. "Enlightenment is an accident. Practice makes accident prone.": We can call that "accident" of Enlightenment whatever we want: IT/Absolute is also infinitely intelligent, and an infinite network of perspectives/holons within Indras Net has to align/"approve"/whatever before ones perspective (the sentient being/you) understands/gets what "It" is ("Full Enlightenment"). There is nothing to be done at THAT point of practice, because any doing would be an arising/movement of thoughts/intentions in consciousness. An a movement of thought/ego is FORM, an appearance, and arising, starting-moving-ending IN THAT/Consciousness/Reality/You. So that is not "It". At the right state, it can happen. That state needs to be cultivated normally over a longtime (practice makes accident-prone). From (for example a description from the Mahamudra-system, but that step-logic of practice is in most systems): Yoga of One Taste (=already nondual) cultivating that state in which the accident can happen, to Yoga of Nonmeditation, in which all activity is stopped, and the meditation does itself, keeping the field nondual, boundless, timeless, mere appearance. In that state the reckognition can happen. When God/The Absolute/The Totality of Indras Net "aligns" and "says yes", "you" get enlightened (the accident). At that point it is grace, Karma, brain chemistry, an act of all of Reality/the Universe/whatever one wants to call it. God/Being/Reality suddenly understanding itself in THAT perspective that is your mindstream of this life. And its impersonal, its not what you think what you are, but what you really are. And the fact that its impersonal is not bad at all... And if Absolute Reality "says": No. Then not today darling... Please more preparation for the "accident". Then, not today darling... Even with DMT. Ok, probably I have confused pretty much everybody with the twisted musings above, but maybe it is useful for some. Water by the River

Yes. or: Nietzsche: God is dead. God: Nietzsche is dead. God (if one is inclined to call it so. Absolute Reality comes a bit less... "God-loaden") contains the ego. But the ego ist for sure not God. The essence of the ego is the same essence as everything else. The ego may think its God, but... well, you know the rest. Actually it is not so difficult to get, both in theory in practice, but apparently its just too much fun for certain egos to consider themselves God. Well, the show made out of that confusion (ego=God) here is .... well. Great Show IMPERSONAL Infinite Consciousness. Which is the same as EMPTY Infinite Consciousness. Which is Reality. That contains it all, ego & character & reality & all the rest. An example: The Reality/essence of a gold ring is gold. If the ring is molten, the essence is still the same. So the essence/God/Reality/Infinite Impersonal Consciousness IS the gold, not the ring. To say the Reality/God is the Ring is incorrect, because the ring can be gone. The ring thinking it is all that exists = Conceptual Solipsism. The gold/IMPERSONAL Empty Infinite Consciousness understanding/realizing its Reality = True Nondual "Solipsism". But if there is only One, or better Oneness, whats the point of talking about Solipsism? To whom? Then the ring is no longer believed. It is seen through. It stops existing as being anything more than an Illusion-arising. Telling other rings/Egos "you are God" only boosts the ring, the clouding over of the actual state of things. It is a trap. What is never the case: Ego = God. Ego = an arising within God/Reality. A part of it. Contained in it. One ring appearing in and made out of an infinite Sea of gold/Impersonal Consciousness/Reality. That is why Awakening is not stable for Psychedelic-only aficionados. Psychedelics "bomb" large parts of the ego/separate self out of functionality (but not all of them), stoppling large parts of the clouding over of the true state of things, revealing larger parts of how Reality/True Nature really is. But not all of them. And especially not when off the trip. And that is why suffering doesn't stop. Ego=separate self= self contraction = regular suffering. Water by the River

Uuum, lets assume Reality is infinite intelligent. Meaning Impersonal Infinite Consciousness manifests an Intelligence that holds Indras Net in itself, infinitely intelligent. And lets assume that: “Enlightenment is an accident. But we can make ourselves more accident prone.” So Reality wants a certain mindstream/states(like boundless timeless infinite mere appearance infinite consciousness)/not-too-unloving-personality/maybe certain other stuff also... : The making oneself accident prone. And then the accident can happen. Its not for the separate-self to decide when precisely that happens. Like I wrote before, there are self-guarding mechanisms of Reality. Reality apparently doesn't want too many enlightened uncompassionate egotists basking 24/7 in the bliss of their true nature. And True Nature = bliss = shutting off the self-contraction in ones head, making the whole field groundless mere appearance floating in infinity, and infinite release a the snap of ones finger. That is just how it is, although many apparently don't like to hear it. Water by the River

Yes. Someone once said (don't know who): “Enlightenment is an accident. But we can make ourselves more accident prone.” That is for example the essence of going from One Taste Yoga of Mahamudra (making the mindstream confirm (or compatible) to the True State of things, like infinite, empty or non-personal, non-conceptual, nondual, boundless, timeless) to Yoga of Nonmeditation of Mahamudra (where one stops doing anything, since "anyone" doing something is an arising in the mindstream covering Impersonal Empty Infinite Consciousness. And the insight of what one really is, and what reality is, is Enlightenment. Can't be forced, happens by itself when the conditions are exactly right. Yes, its tricky. But has a structure to it. But stopping doing anything BEFORE the mindstream conforms to a structure/state where Enlightenment can happen, one can do "nothing" for a long time and the accident/Enlighenment wont happen. Basically going fully Tony Parson. Water by the River

The bubble doesn't even exist. There is no thing, B. Ego may be eternal for the sake of argument, but only in terms of the manner in which one might use the the word "eternal" relative to the context of the discussion. You are discussing something in terms of philosophic distinctions, B. This is not philosophy. I save the term "eternal", for the realm of creation, karma, the micro and macrocosmic elements relative to incrementality, time and evolutionary process, so we are on the same page pertaining to an intrinsic logic limited to this discussion, but, as others are prone to do, you are not alone in limiting yourself to rationalizing the total reality in terms of an either/or ratio-syncretic paradigm. They are the same at the same time in terms of reality (not to mean the Absolute), but in terms of creation, their exclusivity is always dependent on the quality of refined awareness potential practice by the individual; ie, the continuum of individualized attention ranging from karmically-bound to karmic-free individuals. [This is a misnomer because one's very existence is karmic, but for those whose subtle consciousness of psychological momentum preventing them from following karmic patterning as well as perpetuating it in terms of themselves and/or others can be said to exist by a karma-free state of actualization.] If one is limited by psychological relativity, one perpetuates karma based on selfish (personal) modalities. Those who see potential have already entered into the inconceivable, so their modality is transcendental; independent of relativity without harming the creative. This is the meaning of the statement, "Buddhas don't follow precepts, nor do they break precepts." I can't say anything I want in terms of my distinctions based on experience, but you certainly can. I won't be able to entertain your discussion in a philosophical context though, because what I know isn't philosophy. I have posted much in the way of threads over the years relative to the absolute fact of meaninglessness— both in terms of the conditional as well as the absolute. As for reality (suchness in buddhist terms), reality DOES NOT mean anything. I don't know if that would posit the same distinction as meaningless for your purposes, though. Let me address the quote you have provided: The first sentence distinguishes the absolute from the relative (the content of the second sentence). A lazy scholar might mistake the first and second parts of sentence 1 as a statement based on duality, in terms of the absolute (nothing to know) and its [mistaken] relative aspect represented as [no] thing. This would make the absolute dependent on the created, and such is not the case; neither in terms of the construct of the sentence nor by the facts of reality borne by those (enlightening beings) who have seen their nature (enlightening being~ or nonbeing as is the case in fact). So the first sentence as a whole is shorthand for true reality, not just the absolute. Though impersonal knowledge is immediate, there is nothing to know; there is no thing; there is no knower, thinker or liver of life, even in terms of the second sentence: "…ego exists in a void." The nonpsychological knowledge entering into inconceivable knowing is itself a nonoriginated selfless distinction resonating the boundless quality of awake. Beyond any sense of inside or outside, near or far, we can refer to this miracle as unified awareness. Awareness is selfless, nonoriginated, integral Mind alone. There is no way to imply its source. In terms of the nature of human existence and its innate inconceivable potential, just this is the limit of the limitless. There is always that which is beyond our extreme extension of spiritual (nonpsychological) potential. That ego does exist by virtue of Mind alone is relative to creation; whereas no-thing "exists" relative to nonorigination. Nonorigination is not relative to creation. Dogen says, "Wood does not turn into ashes. Ashes do not come from wood." Obviously, as I have said, this is not a philosophical discussion. Since you have yet to see your nature, there is no way for you to know, to see, or to somehow fathom that ego, as such, IS a bubble, and that it does, in fact, exist in a void. So I guess I have to inform you that your statement and the assumption it is based on is erroneous. Even if I now seem to contradict the opening line I wrote in this post, where I wrote: "The bubble doesn't even exist." There is no thing, yet in terms of the void, the empty field's venue staging the bubble's day in the (dim) sun is absolutely as plain as day. In fact, I might add that the "dark" is more brilliant than the "light", in terms of the particular nature of its congealed aspect. Taoism poetically describes such phenomena with the phrase "…in the dark vastness of the void, out of the dimness, a point of illumination, an auspicious object hovering in stillness…" It is also referred to as "liquid pearl", and "the subsuming swirl" [mine-heehee!!]. This is the impersonal aspect of the "all at once" depicted in the Tai Chi symbol, in terms of the eternal truth of the incremental. Those who see their nature can see that it's the totality of "the eternal bubble" you speak of, and yet it does, in fact, exist, in the void. But it cannot exist in terms of itself (yet another sublime parallel to ego). The void doesn't exist, yet in the context of universal mystical visionary experience, the bubble is only a sub-wonder to behold even in its practical aspect as "space-saver." The bubble is, in actuality, the objectification of potential. Only those who see potential can see this in everyday ordinary situations. Real people don't see "things", they see potential. So that's what they deal with, and that's why their actions aren't relative to karma. Only the created is relative and subject to karmic perpetuation (bondage). Those who see nonorigination as potential deal with its essence directly without intermediary and do not accrue that which is relative, in terms of the primal organization. Only nonorigination transcends the primal organization of the creative, psychological processes and time, so it is a unique vessel of unified potential, ever poised to "pass through" the boundary of creative duality, in terms of subtle spiritual adaption based on realization of potential. Those who do so are said to partake of the Supreme Vehicle of buddhas and all prior illuminates, as their entry into the inconceivable is the realization of suchness, neither ordinary nor holy. What is truly wonderful is the knowledge exquisitely exposed as reality on the brink of going into action in perpetuity. Having never moved, such experience is the source of the statement, "Awareness has never moved." In the best, highest meaning of the word, ego should be such a "space-saver" in terms of one's everyday ordinary functionality. For enlightening beings who are fully adept at impersonally adapting enlightenment to conditions without relying on thier own power (by virtue of seeing potential), such is already the case. Someday, you may be able to look forward to the functionality of enlightening activity, in the midst of delusion, by virtue of the delusional, because such activity is based on, and perpetually refreshed by, the incipient upwelling of naturally selfless reality, neither absolute nor conditional. ed note: typo 4th paragraph; add "(yet another sublime parallel to ego)", insert "objectification" and remove "personification" in paragraph 14; split paragraph 14/15

What‘s al-lad? They usually do for me on normal doses but my mind on them is often all over the place often impersonal horrors with luck they can resolve something , it‘s hard to focus on feelings etx

"You" can not be gaslit when having realizing Absolute Truth, or what You really are. To even consider that one can be gaslit on Absolute Truth is a kind of joke. Gaslit by "whom"? Gaslit on "what"? And "who" can be gaslit? When you really get enlightened, and know who you are, you can't doubt that. Until then: Better keep doubting each and any arising in your mindstream, and burn it in the fire of your primordial Impersonal Awareness/Emptiness/Being... Realize what you really are, become Reality itself, and "you" will get the joke. And "you" don't need inner authority, you just need to realize what You are. And then one can be meek&compassionate&loving all day long, and not get gaslit in any way.... Of course, if one still feels gaslit by "external" arisings (or "other" opinions arising in ones perspective) on ones "Awakenings", one has to put ones foot down. Not that the Realization of timeless eternal Absolute Truth suddenly stops, or gets doubted by "others" or "oneself"... As long as there is a "you" that can be led astray.... well, gotta stop the gaslit! Water by the River PS: Real Awakening is not a decission. It is a realization beyond any possible doubt. Doubt arises in IT.

That running around in a wheel is exploring the lower subtle/higher subtle and lower causal areas of manifestation (if one uses Ken Wilber system). It is exploring appearance, or illusion, in the higher levels of manifestation. Beyond ever new Awakenings (the wheel above) there is a final realization into the Nature of Oneself and Reality, as changeless Infinite Impersonal Eternal Reality, which brings the search to a rest, and peace to the seeker (which is gone then, replaced by the Totality which one really is). And that Enlightenment can not be understood (and why it is final) until having had it, and it can not be anticipated/imagined while the separate self has not fully died. If one could imagine or anticipate it, it would have already happened. With Enlightenment, there is an endpoint on the path. Realizing ones True Nature. Totality replacing the separate self, and bliss replacing suffering and misery. If one denies the possibility of Enlightenment, the Awakenings never stop, because Reality is contains Infinity, with an Infinity of Awakenings to explore. Isn't that obvious? One never arrives, is never done. And never done suffering. The wheel above. Suffering will tell the nature of that path. Matthew 7:15-20 Water by the River

I basically wrote the same here: in the post below. Linking to the same questions from months ago. No real answer also, besides some anecdotes abouts rats and icepicks. @Moksha, apparently (and actually) there is no counter-argument remaining concerning what you wrote. Basically, it boils down to the these two aspects: 1) Full Enlightenment = all is illusion, imagination and dream, n+1 (my post quoted above). The realization (all is illusion&dream&imagined) as such apparently is still considered as valid, although that is denied when claimed by Buddhist or "Nonduals" or whatevers, which are supposedly all still dreaming. Without giving any reasons for that, and which is contrary to your experience, and that of countless others having realized their True Nature. 2) Suffering continues until stable establishment of staying permanently in ones True Identity of being Infinite Impersonal Reality/Consciousness (or stable Full Enlightenment), and having the Illusion arising within Oneself. Which requires the complete transcendence/death of any separate-self identity. Apparently a hefty price to be paid. Maybe to hefty for some, surrendering all ones attachments and preferences. All would be so nice and well and lovely, but all these Buddhist rats and other horrible stuff manifesting as illusion in ones dream , apparently still with the potential to spoil the beauty of Absolute Reality Awakening. For me, it looks a bit like some like chasing ones own tail. And being a little bit less than happy if somebody points out that the tail & everything else IS already Ones True Being, and rather prefers to not join the chasing & delighting in the chase. To each his own & Caveat Emptor. Selling Water by the River

For some artwork on the wonder and holiness of Intersubjectivity just google Alex Grey. This whole Solipsism ideology isn't really sexy. Communion, Intersubjectivity and love are such an essential part of the Kosmos. Why did the whole thing get manifested if not for that? Solipsism is true on the level of Pure Impersonal Empty Infinite Consciousness. Before reaching that, rather not... So no need to talk about it, because the separate self/Ego doesn't get to Impersonal Empty Infinite Consciousness in declaring the separate-self God. There is Intersubjectivity woven into the very fabric of the Kosmos at all levels - Ken Wilber I mean seriously, if one can't feel Consciousness or sentience in another human or sentient being maybe there is some unhealthy dissociation or filter somewhere... What is the other? What is sentient and aware in that? What is that consciousness? That can also work as Koan. And directly understanding or intuiting the answer of that Koan is the source of all love, compassion and gentleness. And why talk about it with "others" if there are none? Why post on a forum with "others" about it? And yes I know, it is all a dream. But what is not a dream? Water by the River

If you have awakened from the head, meaning you can comfortably see that reality is impersonal, empty, meaningless, and are completely detached from it, understanding it's all a dream without any substance, then the next thing to do is to awaken from the heart. Develop a pinpoint concentration in your chest, similar to the concentration at the third eye area. Emanate love from the point in your chest once you start feeling that pressure. Emanate more and more, until you realize you can love that point, and that emanation itself, so you detach from the emanation process, and you're loving everything at once from an entirely new dimension. It's a very intense state of love. Then, combine it with your awakening of your head if you haven't already. You'll see that this dream you saw as impersonal has been breathed with life, as if it's one benevolent being, emanating unstoppable love to absolutely nowhere. Now, let your relative self surface and be part of the dream, however, witness how your relative self is so absolutely made of love. If you don't at least have tears in your eyes, you haven't gone deep enough.

SQAAD, you're pure love. Open up your heart and see how Infinity loves you endlessly. Realize the true nature of reality through your heart, not just your head. That's not enough. Reality loves you so dearly that the only reason it exists is because you want to survive. This whole world, all of infinity is only there for you. It loves you so dearly that it doesn't even have a sense of self, that it's one with you. All of life is of no worry when you understand the indestructible shield that is this reality's love for you. All you have to do is to love it back so dearly that you stop existing as a self just like it has done for you. Dissolve yourself in that love and you'll feel a protection like no other. Open your heart, all of this will make sense. You cannot stop worrying by simply understanding the non-duality of reality through your head. If you only awaken through the head, reality feels like a void and impersonal. That's only half the truth. Awaken through your heart.

No it does not. It's just a sweet spot within the dream. I connect with what feels christ consciousness or buddha shapeshifting awareness but that does not mean at all that I am awake, it has nothing to do with God-realization really. It's just a sweet spot within the dream that allows you to be aligned and in harmony with reality. It wasn't in particular to you I was saying it in general. Talking in the spirituality subforum is absolutely wild, here at least we can speak. I really don't know, LSD feels very impersonal and without personality to me. LSD triggers kundalini which I feel is femenine in essenence but therefore saying LSD is femenine would be an error. Most psychedelics that come from plants have some kind of character or traits, but synthetic ones seem to be more transparent in this regard.

Interesting. I doubt it is a dead relative though, since the objects being moved are completely mundane and impersonal (pens, gift wrap, paintings). It's more like I'm being messed with for no reason, rather than some residual imprint from a dead relative. It's very random and impersonal.

It will not matter whether you think of those seconds (the first and last of the universe) linearly or volumetrically, the concept of the speed of light should imply the possibility of thinking about seconds in terms of volumes. In reality however; even volumes wont suffice for the concept of time, for if it did then there could be no beginning of the universe nor any chaos theory. And so without matter and space you can think about time four-dimensionally, and with the addition of matter and space the second (the measured of time) will actually be a five dimensional entity. What I say can sound weird since we have a personal relation to time as something entirely different than spatial, but this simply cuts away information of impersonal matters.

Someone wrote: Often enough, formal meditation practice comes to be a temporary method of comfort or control, or else an experiential device for entering into “adventure” trance-states, which only serves to strengthen the illusion of psychological identity in the transformation-body. The object of authentic zazen “just sitting” practice is becoming familiar with impersonal observation of the circumstantial mental activity (or not) of the thinker, knower and liver of life by a subtly quiescent scrutiny. However it is actualized is less important than NOT arousing the trappings of one’s mental activity to any greater degree than at whatever habitual level it is accustomed, in terms of one’s following thoughts unawares. Since such observation is carried out as a temporary expedient in order to dismiss mental adventurism of all kinds, in all times and places, it would hardly do to create minds within minds where there are actually none to begin with. Those who resort to trance-like methods of comfort would do well to reflect on this. Why? The profound and ancient traditions’ provisional exercises including specific meditative regimens exist to help eliminate habitual diversions and their spinoffs perpetually devised by the psychological apparatus which only serve to obscure naturally enlightening development in oneself. Such development clarifies an inherent ever-ready capacity to see subtle potential by just observing mind by mind without chasing diversionary sidetracks. Breakthrough in meditative arts is for the purpose of discovering the hidden potential in situational parameters prerequisite for penetrating situational accord in a selfless (nonpsychological) capacity. Such capacity is real knowledge. That such knowledge has no object or subject relative to the person means that one’s immediate acquiescence into the workings of everyday ordinary situations is naturally carried out without selfishly complacent socially speculative motivation— even if it is accomplished within the context of one's own psychological (ego) enjoyment in trance-states. It's called practice in reference to a disciplined approach to a subject one has not mastered, being non-ego-motivated activity. This in itself is enlightening accord in reality. Enlightenment, per se, has no motive. How could it, in terms of its nonoriginated aspect? This, for the uninitiated, is what constitutes innocence in oneself, and purity in one's purpose. Once an entry-level capacity for continuous subtle concentration is “isolated” from within the midst of habit-consciousness and other means of deviance from presence, one simply sees reality as is. Just this much carried out over a long time is sufficient to gradually displace egocentric views by natural nonpsychological effect. Observing mental activity at all times by mind does not require a particular posture. It really does not matter at all beyond an unbending intent to simply observe mind by mind. One just witnesses mental activity (or not) without following its contents. Resting mind on itself without unconsciously following its activity is an ancient device to develop the basis for simply being in a state of independent awareness at all times. This is the benefit of observing mind. There is no other benefit that truly serves the selfless intent of authentic and gradual self-refinement subliminally entering into nonorigination. This is so because the human mentality is unable to function independently by force of habitual reliance on externals reifying the person. This is because the psychological apparatus identifies as the being that is going to die, parodying existence only by comparing itself to objects not considered itself. Its function, having become unnecessarily personified, obscures real (selfless) being’s spiritual function. The temporary device observing mind by mind jumpstarts the natural process of self-refinement which gradually diminishes the artificial to arrive at the real, in terms of human being naturally independent of pattern-consciousness. As for witnessing witnessing, this is a perversion of practical mind by mind scrutiny developed by all authentic teachings. Do not let this develop further. When noting this condition and it doesn’t evaporate on the spot, do not follow it. Just take a break for a while and start again later. As soon as one can observe mind in the midst of everyday ordinary situations without following its thought-streams unawares, one should hasten to do so. Silent sitting is suitable for rank beginners. Real practice and adaptive power that does not depend on oneself develops gradually in the midst of ordinary situations. Though formal meditation is to be considered a temporary expedient, it shouldn’t necessarily be dismissed by adepts of advance self-refining practice altogether.

Infinite Consciousness/Reality (I don't use God though technically correct because it creates more misunderstandings in this context than it solves. Like blowing up the Ego to God-sized dimensions, which the exactly opposite route than transcending the separate self/Ego) is awake throughout. IT is aware, and is what you really are. "It" (True You) is nothing specific (despite containg/being everything), but empty Awareness. Totally empty/nothing, but aware, and containing all form. But arising in it is what you think yourself to be right now (I-thoughts and I-feelings), that you don't see/view fast enough to transcend. You see "through" them, like coloured lenses. These lenses of perceptions (I-thoughts and I-feelings, separate-self arisings, making you feel and think you are a body or mind WITHIN Reality, but somehow separate from the boundless Reality) are what cloud your understanding of the Nature of Infinite Consciousness/Reality. When you learn to view (and cut) these arisings fast enough (long training process normally), awakened or nondual states can appear. Then the locatedness of "you" drops, making You the whole field. And other effects (infinite, eternal/always here, empty/impersonal). The three points above are at least in my perspective more useful to describe the process (than asking what wakes up, God or Ego), because: God or Infinite Consciousness doesn't awake. It is always awake/aware, can't be different. The Ego doesn't really exist (EXist=stand out from Raelity). So it can't wake up. It the sum/Gestalt of the appearance of I-thoughts, I-feelings that arise in True You. Once your mindstream/perspective awakenes, these arisings are no longer believed and (if wanted) totally cut off. Your Ego/character becomes literally something like moskito buzzing around in you. And if the character becomes annoying/suffering, you can "chase" it away like an annoying insect. The volume/believeability of its voice goes to "lower than 5%" of what is was before. That is just a pointer. It can only be really understood what it happens. The tools you use to imagine that state (necessarily including I-thoughts) are those that prevent the awakend state in which you could understand it. So the path is Meditation, Trekchö/Cut-Off every thought, Neti Neti, get empty, change to awakened states. And let these states refine and empty your Identity towards Truth. Because what clouds your mindstream, what you think you are, the I-feelings and I-thoughts, are not what you really are. You are much more. But you can only authentically say that when you are in awakened states. Before having stabilized these nondual states, thinking you are everything is just wishful thinking. It doesn't end suffering. Because it is not a change of thinking/concepts. It is not deciding or believing to no longer belief concepts (That "stripping" would be more concepts). it is learning to cut any arising concept/belief/I-thought/I-feeling FAST enough so that your state changes to awakened and nondual states. Thinking to want to no longer belief or stripping of beliefs/ideologies is itself a thought process, not the cutting of all thought arisings including that one. These are very specific states that have counterparts in the bodily energies for example. Enlightenment is a state shift towards nondual, boundless, and empty/impersonal (at least if there is intention for cutting the mindstream if wanted, for example for getting the bliss of the primordial Consciousness). At other times, the character can do its thing. But the body-mind has become an object doing its thing within YOU, Reality itself. (1) If it wouldn't remove suffering, what should make you stay in these enlightened states? You would continue grasping and searching for evermore experiences, like every unenlighened being. (2) Also, you will know the nature of Absolute Reality beyond any doubt. That includes what You are, what Reality is, what every arising/form/phemenon is in its essence, and that you are immortal. And nothing else can be anything different than THAT. Since anything there could be, in any dimension or realm, would just be more "form" or content arisings within Infinite Consciousness. But what would (2) be worth if you still suffer? You would search and grasp for some other experiences... Which obviously the enlightened ones stopped doing. All of them, at all times. They didn't grasp for experiences, and didn't suffer when they didn't get certain experiences. They for sure had preferences, could feel pain, but they didn't grasp or "psychologically-suffering-wise" resist what is. She who is centered in the Tao can go where she wishes, without danger. She perceives the universal harmony, even amid great pain, because she has found peace in her heart. - Tao Te Ching Since every separate being (or better: perspective) is at its essence Infinite Consciousness/Reality itself, every mindstream will end up enlightened. The game is to cast the formless out into form, explore the infinities of infinities that can be manifested (God will never run out of these), and come back home. It is the nature of Reality. It is apparently what Reality does. Love is what throws it all out, and pulls it all back, and its also the essence of every form. That btw. is not fancy mental musings, but actual Reality, potentially directly experienceable by every(!) being in certain awakened states. Water by the River PS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrival_(film) "During the evacuation, Donnelly expresses his love for Banks. They talk about life choices and whether he would change them if he could see the future. Banks knows that she will agree to have a child with him despite knowing their fate: that Hannah will die from an incurable disease and Donnelly will leave them both after she reveals that she knew this."

Well, BazookaJesus is the most AWAKE, and Nobody is enlightened. Ok, enough kidding. Awakening: Basically, you can experience 95% of Nonduality/Mystical Experiences with a center/separate-self still not fully seen through/transcended. And that is what prevents fully realizing or Being Absolute Reality/Infinite Consciousness itself. You definitely can have Unity/Nonduality Experiences with some kind of separate-self (although often quite empty, ego/persona quite transcended) still well & alive. Full Enlightenment: When these last remnants of the separate self disfiguring True Nonduality (or ones True Nature of Infinite Reality itself) are seen through, transcended, suffering ends and grasping for experiences/insights/understandings end. Impersonal centerless Empty Boundless Eternal Infinite Consciousness/Reality. That which you and every being already is right now, can never not be, but are (maybe) not fully aware of. Semantic Challenge: Often Enlightenments and Awakenings are equated and/or confused. But most often, Enlightenment is considered an "end-state", an end of suffering. Understanding of relative stuff and exploration & the adventure of course can continue. But beyond Full Enlightenment there is only more relative stuff (form) to explore. The Absolute Reality has been understood or realized. Suffering is dramatically(!) reduced and the potential of Ones True Nature to fully end suffering is understood and takes over understanding/being what One really is is the hallmark of Full Enlightenment. More on the topic: And confusing Awakening and (Full) Enlightenment is confusing the road to more high-level-dreams (with some necessary illusion/ignorance/suffering) with the road to the Deep Identity Level Shift of Full Enlightenment, or the end of suffering. All has its time and place, and the point of the ride is the ride. But at some point, comming home is also wonderful. Beautiful Book: Coming Home: The Experience of Enlightenment in Sacred Traditions, Lex Hixon Bon Voyage Water by the River

Nobody typed that and nobody is typing this either. As soon as you start thinking there is somebody who sees or types or whatever, then you are seeing a separation, or AT LEAST a mixing of two different parts, like the one who types it plus what is typed. It's not clear to me right now and is something I only touched for the briefest moment, but it should be logically obvious: If there is ONLY reality itself and nothing more, then even if there is someone who sees something, what could be doing that seeing except from reality itself? Someone sent me a post earlier and it is true, when we are seeing from our eyes with an ego active, it is impossible for the sight to look anything other than in front of us. We can't envision the sight being behind or beside us. Because our minds are adding a fictional layer of a position of observing to that image. And the position of observing is where the ego lives. If the ego is taken out of the image completely, and you leave ONLY the image, then every time that image appears, no matter who it seems to be appearing to, it appears the same. It is also important to consider that all categorical divides are just thoughts in your head. In reality there is no categorical difference between qualia and dead matter in some distant galaxy, without a mind to apply a categorical division dead matter is not substantially different to qualia. Dead matter seems impersonal to us, like atoms can exist before our birth and after our death, and even without any living being at all. If you can comprehend qualia existing just as impersonally as that, you might get it.

If wise words prove a person is enlightened, do unwise words prove the opposite? I suppose that's why silence is the purest pointer to the impersonal.