Consilience

Not necessarily. Yes that could happen, but then that wouldn't be what this pointing out of fearlessness points towards, nor does this pointing out of the nature of self and fearlessness necessitate the spinning of a story of an I that is threatened getting to a place where the I is secure. True fearlessness has no problems experiencing fear. We can hold space for this actuality when communicating about this clear seeing into the nature of self such that there is no longer fear, the simultaneous seeing that there was never fear. Again, paradox.

Well for one, recognizing God‘s will can’t be misaligned with in the first place. In a more practical way, Bashar’s idea of following your highest joy in the best way you know how in a moment has always deeply resonated. But removing the duality of you could have ever been misaligned is a necessary first step.

Disagree wholeheartedly. If this was recognized by a self, then it would not be the insight that the self is not real. Which is the akin to the Neo Advaita trap of over intellectualizing this stuff. If you disagree, then it is due to a communication barrier and limitation of words. The recognition that the self is an illusion occurs to nothing, no one, yet occurs though simultaneously having always been - paradox.

Lol... Yes freedom. Always was, before, during, after any seeking, before, during, after any realization, and before, during, after any altered states. So why practice meditation? There are no definitive answers. Any rationalizations aren't it. Any reasons to stop are not the reasons it was stopped. And as others have mentioned, all of life is one giant meditation.

The recognition didn’t occur to an individual. It occurred as the substrate of what is real, reality as itself. This is what your message always misses, the recognition that this recognition can occur in and of itself for no one. There is no one home, only a spontaneous play of self activity. Who I am is no one. What I am is utterly wordless.

Agreed ??

There is something to be found. There are depths and degrees to this realization as well, while there is a simultaneous equilibrium across all states, stages, experiences, and moments of infinite being's expression. Again, paradox. Embracing this paradox is how one discovers true liberation. Denying it, not recognizing it, still samsara.

This simply isn’t my experience. What I define as Enlightenment is available now and was not available when I was younger before seeking yet was always the case due to the fact that it was true. There was a direct encounter with my true nature, the culmination of the seeking dissolving into and as my true nature. There is something the words “Absolute Truth” point towards. It’s literally a paradox, a cosmic paradox that won’t ever make sense to the linear human mind. Perhaps I got lucky. But once the recognition has occurred, all doubts disappear. Saying enlightenment isn’t real is like someone telling me color isn't real as I stare into a rainbow.

Thank you brother. And I hear you on the jesus part… it’s probably harder for me to hold space for this due to my conditioning growing up in such a hostile environment as a child, being judged and told I would go to hell by other kids because I wasn’t christian. But there is definitely that mystical side and the room for faith. So again, thank you for that pointing out.

And how much experience do you actually have of people in the west? Sounds like you’re parroting actualized.org dogma honestly. “those people probably ought to just take drugs or not bother” lmao duuuuude. The meditation circles Im apart of, people who have had wild success with meditation are not bipolar or schizophrenic. I am not these either and have had a lot of success. Go to some meditation retreats, hell do one yourself. You may find some. Or ya know, go take drugs. “Those who know do not speak. Those who speak do not know.” - Dao De Ching Guess I have a big mouth or don’t know

Thank you. Im glad it resonates

@Adamq8 Resonate with much of your post. Please understand the calling out of Christianity was not a calling out of it as a non-dual mystical tradition. I was referring to the dogmatic forms we see most commonly today. I never stated one was more important. I dont really draw a distinction between meditation and deep contemplation. Both are contemplative practices. True contemplation is just the other side of the coin of true meditation. Though not stated in op, Im with you. This, however, is not something the majority of Christians on the planet do. Because the ultimate nature of reality transcends whether Im in the andromeda galaxy or any other, it’s independent of the context of any and all experience or relative phenomena, hence it’s the nature of reality. And yes through meditation, or contemplation, accident. Doesnt really matter. The clear recognition beyond doubt is what matters. And the humility to see there is further to go. Im not claiming to be jesus. What does this have to do with the thread?

The belief in Jesus is the dynamic of placing conditions on the happiness you described in the first paragraph. After having grown up in TN surrounded by many fundamentalists, it’s crystal clear their happiness is based on conditioned experience, beliefs. So while yes the happiness in and of itself is never not true or pure, the context in which it’s held can be deeply conditioned. So while it’s true it can be helpful in a certain context as you described in the second paragraph, it’s still built off of a foundation of 1) belief rather than direct experience 2) attachment and the unconscious and sometimes conscious forms of suffering that arise when life challenges those attachments, and 3) dishonesty, which is misaligned with truth and therefore misaligned with love. Most do not see how deeply dishonest they are being as a result of their religion. The christians that are actually being honest and grounding their understanding from direct experience are mystics, not fundamentalists. The devilry is replacing an honest not knowing with beliefs and thinking this is equivalent. Dishonesty about one’s understanding ultimately what Im referring to as devilry. Of course this is relative, a pointer. The dogmatic insistence of believing in the thoughts is what Im referring to as devilry. If there was open-mindedness, honesty, inquiry, etc., this would be a different story. What Im suggesting is there is much, much, much more than simply letting go of surface level thinking. Yet it’s all one, goes nowhere and is truly, never attained. Hence this paradox I keep going on about.

The thread speaks for itself brother. So do my other posts. Im glad you’ve found happiness and peace in this life. Im glad Neo Advaita brings others peace and happiness. But that doesn’t mean it’s true Enlightement nor peace beyond conditioned circumstance. I write for those interested in an authentic consciousness of what is true.

@Gili Trawangan I got you https://youtu.be/4KXidr0z1RY

My opinion is that meditation needs to be practiced in an experimental, holistic way - learn multiple techniques from multiple masters and in a sense, follow your bliss. If that means jhana practice for a bit, do that, if that means switching to vipassana, do that, maybe shikantaza is what's resonating now, so go do that. The key is to developing enough skill to where we can reliably follow our intuition. It also seems that true momentum with meditation is impossible without dedicated retreat time, whether in a group or solo. I had a full blown, utterly profound Enlightenment experience using Shinzen Young's See Hear Feel vipassana technique on retreat so I am a bit biased towards vipassana. From what I can tell, alternating between a discriminatory practice like vipassana and integrative practice like do nothing all the while throwing in shamatha/jhana for when things get particularly heavy (dark night of the souls like) seem to be the most powerful. The key though is to practice with the clear understanding that what is true is always true, and no matter where we go, we are never moving towards or further away from this actuality. When the increases in consciousness from meditation are grounded in this actuality... This is meditation. At least, that's how I frame it. It's extremely difficult to even communicate or understand conceptually for myself. So yes, generally I'd recommend: - Deconstructive - Vipassana/Self-inquiry - Unifying - Do Nothing/Dzogchen - Enjoy wholesomely - Shamatha/jhana/loving kindness - Retreats at least once a year, if not more First two have provided more depth to consciousness for me though, as in are more non-dual. And sometimes the mind gets into such a state that the first 3 jhanas are really distracting compared to the bliss of resting as consciousness, directly. And anyways, I'm pretty sure you're beyond my level with meditation so what would be your advice regarding "proper meditation?" @BipolarGrowth

This. Ego, no ego. Can we be directly conscious in the moment of total self fixation? Don’t really resonate with Sadguru’s description of Enlightenment. Sounds way too conditional, specific, exclusive. Really happy to hear the energy work and other modalities worked out and that you’re in a healthier state! Seriously huge ?

That’s really funny because the exact thing the teaching is refuting is the exact thing that facilitated my Awakening/Enlightenment… ? Here I am still meditating like a mofo totally aware of it’s ultimate uselessness, a poster child for Neo Advaitans on what not to do, yet having seen beyond the need to let go or not let go. Reality still holds impersonal curiosity, so away it goes ?

The seeking energy cannot hear or not hear, it is merely an empty appearance. Nor can if end or not end by any recognition, it is a spontaneous emergence of reality, completely irrelevant to Truth. What is true is already true before, during, and after seeking. Even while seeking persists, there can be recognition of actuality of what is ultimately true. This, however, is totally off the radar in the Neo Advaita community. And ultimately that’s fine.

It’s basically when you become conscious of what seeking is, who is (or isn’t) seeking, what is (or isn’t) seeking as not me, not mine, just more phenomena. Wholeness, boundless freedom, unconditional love, God, emptiness can be recognized all the while the seeking energy remains. What is true is already true regardless of whether seeking is present, so whether seeking ends or doesn't is irrelevant for what is absolutely true. In my own case, it's been recognized no one at all is seeking, yet reality is still practicing intense meditation, going evermore deeply within the source of actuality, or Being. Yet the practicing is non-personal, un-fixated, spontaneous. I also notice the more this personal body-mind practices, the healthier (in relative terms) all of life becomes. Perhaps no, but most people who think they're just “being” are not, but are unaware of this because their minds are so subtle, so unconscious, they’re unaware. This is why formal practice is useful. It is a litmus test for where you’re actually at. Why is “just being” so difficult after a measly 2 hours of sitting still? Because the sentient being is not actually conscious of what Being, existential Being, really is. Of course this is a double edged sword because it can reinforce a sense of agency and seeking. But on the other hand, hardcore meditation is radically less risky than prematurely giving it all up.

Got it. Yeah I feel you on this. From my own perspective, this doesn’t sound crazy at all, matches my own experience. Yes even with the screaming and crying, just automatic responses of the body-mind.

Early on in the path, yes. Now? No, not at all. Whether seeking energy is or isnt present is irrelevant. The capacity to seek without seeking is a cornerstone for true meditative progress. Im glad they’re useful. If they resonate, don’t let my shit posting stop you from getting value. That’s not true meditation. True meditation is not about reaching some kind of state. The first part of this quote is more akin to true meditation. Definitely ?

The intent isn't to sit down and talk about the suffering of the world for the sake of talking about the suffering of the world. I'm bringing it up in the context of the discussion about this teaching style, Neo Advaita. Talking about the suffering of the world is not a waste of energy if we are interested in discovering what is true. If we agree that suffering is ultimately illusory, which based on prior interactions I assume you understand this, then the discussion of The First Noble Truth is not a waste of time. When we can admit "Ok... Suffering is present" this immediately tells us there is ignorance, unconsciousness. When we are honest about where we are, rather than falling back into beliefs about "this is it!" rather than a genuine consciousness, such an honesty allows us the possibility of directly experiencing what is actually true. The key is to realize suffering without suffering, but watching Anna Brown videos isn't going to get someone there. To be honest, I don't know what you are trying to point towards in this discussion. Any clarity is welcome.

Bingo Reminds me of a meme I saw recently:

Because out of all the indicators for how conscious one is, it's one of the best. By suffering I mean pain * resistance, essentially. That's a super simplified model but it's pretty clear, I believe. Edit: And as one actually works towards raising their level of consciousness (notice how this contradicts the idea that "This is it!" but in actuality, there is no contradiction. Primordial Paradox is not something the ego mind can do), suffering goes down because resistance goes down. The nature of resistance and pain is seen. All phenomena start to be experienced as their actuality rather than ego-mind projections. Going full circle is experience these ego-mind projections in the same consciousness as when they're absent. It's not personal though so the question "why is suffering so important to you?" doesn't really mean much. It's simply what I see when I look out at the world. I see countless sentient beings unconsciously suffering and I see that suffering manifest itself in utterly dysfunctional, incongruent ways. Again though, it's not personal. It's just apart of the whole.