Is discussing and talking about non-duality/enlightenment pointless?

[lmfao]

I can't help but feel that since thoughts are just another part of the happening (like the things you hear and see in the external world), using thoughts and communicating about states of higher consciousness feels pointless and is a waste of time. If I've finished meditating I'll feel as though any of the words I say are vacuous and contain no more truth in them then birds chirping or random colours. It just seems to me that talking about enlightenment and similar things will not help you fundamentally understand things deeper. I can't help but feel that the right approach to consciousness work is to just close your mouth and pay attention to reality as it is. 

Beyond instructions and advice for meditation and other practices, do you think that there is a place for discussing enlightenment (I'm not referring to self actualisation concepts)? Do you think discussions about enlightenment and deep non-duality are helpful and useful? In what situations do you think they are? I think that provided we aren't referring to someone experiencing deep emotional problems and barriers, discussions on enlightenment may be interesting but for the most part it wont get anywhere. I feel it worth mentioning that any verbal exchanges we make regarding enlightenment (and any other topic for that matter, like this question) are by very definition "ego-driven" and involve a communication between egos. 

[Elysian]

Leo explains this in this video:

 

I've been contemplating/integrating this over the past couple days. Meaning is a creation of the Mind, there being a point to something is a projection of meaning made by whoever sees a point in it. Which is to say everything is meaningless in the objective sense. 

This really resonated with me because when I had my temporary self-realization, immediately the weight behind everything was just gone. I couldn't put it into words, but Leo explained it really well here. 

[Jack River]

I feel ya. To me it’s worth talking about duality, self, thought as process/movement, as thought/self and thoughts-feelings/emotions and how they are related to form certain experiences. 

But to talk about enlightenment/nonduality does serve the self/ego and is to work within the narrrow structure/pattern of thought/self/duality. 

 

Edited November 3, 2018 by Jack River

[Leo Gura]

There is value in talking about it so as to point out all the traps, explain the techniques, clear up egoic confusion, and inspire/motivate people into action.

But philosophizing, speculating, or debating about nonduality is counter-productive.

[Jack River]

3 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

There is value in talking about it so as to point out all the traps, explain the techniques, clear up egoic confusion, and inspire/motivate people into action.

I agree. To point out connections in falsity, and to bring that to awareness. To bring to attention the nature of the conditioned consciousness is important. 

[Jack River]

For me, when experience stops being projected on top of “each moment” that is what this “nonduality” points too. 

Edited November 3, 2018 by Jack River

[lmfao]

@Elysian For me to say whether something is meaningful, meaningless or pointless I am by definition comparing that something to some, ultimately subjective, standard imo.

@Outer @Jack River @Leo Gura I pretty much agree with you here. 

[Jack River]

@lmfao 

action in day to day life ultimately expresses if we “get it” or not. The degree that this thought/feeling cycle of reactions stops feeding themselves determines this oneness or wholeness. There is a great deal to understand about self/thought/the known and its nature. But the unknown comes about when all that stops feeding itself. Anyway I feel ya my dude. ?

 

Edited November 3, 2018 by Jack River

[now is forever]

@Joseph Maynor yes joseph or you just make a break or you just walk into the field, or into the jungle, or you just don‘t fix your eyes on the path all the time - because there is so much more to see than the dusty road.

there is a path wherever you walk - you make it.

[now is forever]

@Outer what kind of product placement is that?

i can’t even confuse it with a pear even if i wanted to.

 

and honestly if oneness boils down to that for you - i don’t know but then i guess i lost all my spirituality.

?? =??? ?

Edited November 3, 2018 by now is forever

[WelcometoReality]

@lmfao If it's grounded in you own enlightenment work then, yes, there is a point to talk about it. But if it's just a random discussion about spiritual concepts it's just a distraction.

[Jack River]

Awareness doesn’t carve a path. Awareness moves effortlessly/harmoniously without leaving any trace because awareness isn’t restricted to a path. Awareness stands way above and observes from a high position, the whole path itself. It’s sees all the dead ends and obstructions all at once and sees perhaps the vanity/uselessness go about things that way. Intelligence/insight sees the whole map/territory and there is total action as a result of that. Intelligence steps out of that conditioned pattern of pursuit as a result of that insight. 

 With a carful and sensitive stride (awareness), no path is established/projected, and therfore no remains of such path are present. 

When it comes to liberation/truth/freedom maybe there is no path. Maybe the path itself ends where freedom begins. A lot of people say a path is necessary, but I wonder if the realization that there is no such path is more necessary.Maybe freedom begins when we see the falsity of a path and step out of that conditioned pattern of time. After all is the means(path) actually any different than self/ego and its attachment to thought itself?

[Joseph Maynor]

14 minutes ago, Jack River said:

Awareness doesn’t carve a path. Awareness moves effortlessly/harmoniously without leaving any trace because awareness isn’t restricted to a path. Awareness stands way above and observes from a high position, the whole path itself. It’s sees all the dead ends and obstructions all at once and sees perhaps the vanity/uselessness go about things that way. Intelligence/insight sees the whole map/territory and there is total action as a result of that. Intelligence steps out of that conditioned pattern of pursuit as a result of that insight. 

 With a carful and sensitive stride (awareness), no path is established/projected, and therfore no remains of such path are present. 

When it comes to liberation/truth/freedom maybe there is no path. Maybe the path itself ends where freedom begins. A lot of people say a path is necessary, but I wonder if the realization that there is no such path is more necessary.Maybe freedom begins when we see the falsity of a path and step out of that conditioned pattern of time. After all is the means(path) actually any different than self/ego and its attachment to thought itself?

There is a Path — but it can be clung to too long like a baby clinging to its favorite blanket.

Edited November 3, 2018 by Joseph Maynor

[now is forever]

well there are more than one paths - depends on the one we want to walk. there are many old paths walked by many before us and the small path to our hideouts we shaped by walking it every day the same way in the grass - maybe that’s the one we have to give up, so grass can grow over it? 

there are so many paths we don’t see.

[Jack River]

34 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

There is a Path — but it can be clung to too long like a baby clinging to its favorite blanket.

That is the nature of self. What I am suggesting is maybe the self and the path are codependent. A resipirical/co-sustaining relationship that feeds itself in that relationship. 

Maybe the self and the means/path are really one unit in movement as psychological time. The baby=self and the blanket=thought/path. This insight I am speaking about sees the totality of this self momentum as one unit at work and perhaps stays away from that pattern of disorder/conflict. 

And I question whether there is any clinging when this huge insight acts on consciousness. Such reactionary response such as clinging to the blanket may mean truth/freedom/liberation hasn’t yet been actually “SEEN”. 

But I don’t know. I’m sure someone out there understands what I mean. 

 

Edited November 3, 2018 by Jack River

[Jack River]

When I say path I mean that which has been established in the past/thought. 

So self and path both an invention of that field of time/thought/the past...self/ego is born of the past and so is various paths/tradition/culture/thought that that self depends on to free “itself”.  But this sustains that movement of self. It’s self strengthening its own illusion by thinking it can find an answer in thought. But thought and self are one, so it really just makes “me” feel more real. Pretty gnarly. 

Just to clear up any possible confusion in what I mean dudes. 

Edited November 3, 2018 by Jack River

[now is forever]

@Jack River thanks for the translation, dude. first time time/thought fitted completely.

??‍♂️=??‍♀️

 

but what is with the walking of time/path?

Edited November 3, 2018 by now is forever

[tecladocasio]

@lmfao If nobody talked about non-duality/enlightenment with you , would you still be doing enlightment work , meditation , etc ?

I think talking about this things are crucial , to a point .

[Rilles]

Does the content of thoughts stop awareness?

[now is forever]

6 hours ago, Rilles said:

Does the content of thoughts stop awareness?

are you aware of the content?