Non-duality and pleasure

[Ananta]

Just now, Faceless said:

No YOU just don’t get it. Take yesterday’s question I asked. Have you even considered it to be the case? 

The question where you responded with “no” 

I don't listen to you, because your crazy. 

[Faceless]

2 minutes ago, Anna1 said:

I don't listen to you, because your crazy. 

That’s that fear. Watch It, it will get you. ?

You are the ones trying to play enlightened. I don’t even bring that word up. 

Edited June 10, 2018 by Faceless

[Ananta]

@Faceless I think you're doing a shit ton of "MOVEMENT OF THOUGHT"....watch out, that'll get ya!

[Saumaya]

2 minutes ago, Faceless said:

@Saumaya

only I assume you understand the difference between the Krishnamurti sharings between the the nonduality teachings. 

I remember reading J Krishnamurti's Freedom from known 3 -4 years ago. I really liked it at that time. I dont remember what j krishnamurti said though, hell I dont remember most of the stuff other teachers taught. I understand the true nature of reality completely so I dont feel a need. If I try to recall correctly, his teachings are not exactly non dual but they do share some similarity in ending duality.

[Faceless]

Just now, Saumaya said:

If I try to recall correctly, his teachings are not exactly non dual but they do share some similarity in ending duality.

??

Yes. We should work on what is actually moving inside of us. Not escape what is “duality” to an idea of nonduality. Which is generally what nonduality teachings promote. 

[Saumaya]

7 minutes ago, Faceless said:

??

Yes. We should work on what is actually moving inside of us. Not escape what is “duality” to an idea of nonduality. Which is generally what nonduality teachings promote. 

yeah

[Ananta]

5 minutes ago, Faceless said:

Which is generally what nonduality teachings promote. 

What do you know about Advaita Vedanta? Probably nothing. So, you don't know what it is or what is taught. If you're talking about the neo-Advaita movement, that's got nothing to do with Vedanta.

 

 

[Faceless]

Just now, Saumaya said:

yeah

That’s what I mean by calling out all the bs. 

 

[Saumaya]

I dont know why @Etagnwo and @Anna1  defend their traditions so much. Its kind of....strange.

[Faceless]

2 minutes ago, Anna1 said:

What do you know about Advaita Vedanta? Probably nothing. So, you don't know what it is or what is taught. If you're talking about the neo-Advaita movement, that's got nothing to do with Vedanta.

I don’t care what it is. You don’t need to study a teaching to understand duality in yourself and be aware of duality in yourself. 

 

 

[Saumaya]

For example my main teachers during my  journey were peter ralston, jed mckenna and ug krishnamurti. If someone says something against them, I dont feel a need to defend them, they dont need my defending. Teachers are boats to an island you want to travel to, once you reach the island, its time to abandon the boat.

[Ananta]

3 minutes ago, Saumaya said:

I dont know why @Etagnwo and @Anna1  defend their traditions so much. Its kind of....strange.

I referenced Vedanta because faceless said-

 "Not escape what is “duality” to an idea of nonduality. Which is generally what nonduality teachings promote."

He doesn't know what's promoted or not promoted. 

[Faceless]

9 minutes ago, Saumaya said:

I dont know why @Etagnwo and @Anna1  defend their traditions so much. Its kind of....strange.

The ego clings to that which has strengthened and perpetuated its own movement. 

They have nourished the ego. Been deceived by thought. 

Edited June 10, 2018 by Faceless

[Saumaya]

10 minutes ago, Faceless said:

You don’t need to study a teaching to understand duality in yourself and be aware of duality in yourself. 

True, but initially, a proper teaching can be helpful

[Ananta]

4 minutes ago, Faceless said:

The ego clings to that which has strengthened and perpetuated it own movement. 

@Saumaya when did I defend it? Stating that someone doesn't know or understand the teachings is not defending. Not in my book at least.

[Faceless]

7 minutes ago, Saumaya said:

True, but initially, a proper teaching can be helpful

If it is something that shows the importance of not escaping. Or going into how somthing works like thought is not the teachings I am referring to. I mean all the romantic and sentimental glorified mumbojumbo. Anything that doesn’t promote understanding the self. 

Not teachings as in offering things to believe in and promote self deception.  Not just merely an accumulation of information for one to hide behind. Bury the fear. 

More about understanding what is actual. And working with that. 

I already known you appreciate that @Saumaya

Edited June 10, 2018 by Faceless

[Saumaya]

2 minutes ago, Anna1 said:

Stating that someone doesn't know or understand the teachings is not defending

Maybe not defending, but you do seem to indirectly say that they are right and legitimate. I don't know. I never feel a need to tell someone that someone else's teaching is right, unless its about some specific issue which I have a opinion on.

[Saumaya]

7 minutes ago, Faceless said:

If it is something that shows the importance of not escaping. Or going into how somthing works like thought is not the teachings I am referring to. I mean all the romantic and sentimental glorified mumbojumbo. Anything that doesn’t promote understanding the self. 

Yeah, exactly why I emphasised proper in "proper teaching".

[Ananta]

8 minutes ago, Saumaya said:

Maybe not defending, but you do seem to indirectly say that they are right and legitimate.

 

...actually, thats exactly what faceless is doing about his "teaching"...oops, I meant Krishnamurti's. Hahaha

Edited June 10, 2018 by Anna1

[Faceless]

Just now, Etagnwo said:

Nobody is defending traditions

That is your interpretation. 

What we are actually doing is exposing faceless for the liar he is. Because he has lied. And now he's trying to spin more elaborate nonsense to take away from the fact he is lying. 

The best form of defence is attack. And that's what faceless is doing 

What was lied about?