• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Lister

  • Rank
    - - -

Personal Information

  • Gender
  1. That's not even what I am saying lol. If you had the maturity to actually keep an open mind and try to understand instead of offloading your assumptions then you wouldn't appear the fucking joke that you are on here.
  2. You actually live as a crazed zealot spamming an internet site because you're addicted to it. But even your bud inlytened doesn't think you have had an experience. How s that for a home truth?
  3. Your frequency is your frequency. Tuned to new age FM. You have no teachings, you can't communicate discrimination and you clearly haven't taken me up on my challenge to strip the shads. Because you cant. You have a pretence of being able to critique the oldest enlightenment teaching known to us but actually don't even know what it says. You're a charlatan
  4. That's your story. Not once have I mentioned that this is exclusive to me. But it seems that people keep insisting that this is about me. It's not about me, it's about you too. You and everyone can realize the self in an instance if you know how to discriminate. The work thereafter is about training the mind not to seek satisfaction in the world and to rest as non dual awareness. I'm not the guy who uses the "when you've read as much psychology as I have" argument in most of his debates, YOU are buddy. I'm not making YouTube videos claiming I'm more realized than a 40 year Zen master..YOU are the one that's doing those things. So reasess. Or don't, I don't care. I just know that your ideas about enlightenment are idiosyncratic models taken from your own personal drug experiences and filtering perennial philosophy teachings through your own filter.
  5. Who says? Some random nobody on the internet who has an incessant need to be right and grativates to positions of power over others? You think you know more that every human being alive and the oldest non dual text in existence?
  6. @zeroISinfinity Even awareness gets completely obliterated? And what was aware of that experience? Think now.
  7. This means absolutely nothing to anyone except you. It's just words. You cannot give a person discrimination because you don't know what it means. You told me that my relative perspective is what I'm clinging to. But you haven't addressed the fact that the upanishads also confirm what I'm saying, and that everyone can verify the upanishads by admitting that they are aware. This isn't my relative perspective. It's an obvious fact. But we can still go over the shads if you like. Let's see how well you understand them. To critique something you must understand it first. That's just logic. My evidence comes from subjective, collective and objective sources. They all verify the same thing. Stop projecting your issues onto me and fucking deal with them.
  8. It depends on what you think enlightenment is? If I said to you that enlightenment is wearing pink socks, and there were a few who turned up in pink socks, you could argue that those wearing pink socks fit your definition of what enlightenment is. But Maya is so tricky that it can leave the interpreter unable to fathom what it really is and makes all manner of erroneous assumption based on their experiences and teachings filtered through their mind. Unless a teaching can enlighten an ordinary joe on the street by helping him discriminate awareness from the objects appearing in it, and can raise unanimous agreement that the only thing we can all 100% agree on is that we are aware, then anything else is just a mind trick.
  9. You're not conscious of truth. You are conscious of ideas and you had an experience. Can your teaching enlighten a man on the street who has never even heard of the self? No. But point out what discrimination is and he will know who he is. The litmus test of a teaching is whether it can enlighten people. How many people has actualized. Org actually enlightened.? 0. That should ring some alarm bells for most intelligent people.
  10. Is that so? I don't even know what you're referring to because you don't even have a grasp on Maya. You just regurgitate spiritual ideology and memories you had. You have no actual means of knowledge and a way to verify it.
  11. Yes, in your story. Nobody else can verify your story. Everyone can verify discrimination. That's why it's the truth. What you did was cherry pick part of my argument (supplying text from the uoanishads) in order to support your story. You conveniently left out that fact that everyone can realize awareness in a moment. That illuminates your lies for what it is, a personal story to protect your spiritual ego. Is it a coincidence you're engaging with me in this fashion directly after a heated pm exchange where you tried to exert power over me because I called you out on a mod decision? This little witch hunt has nothing to do with that convo whatsoever, has it? ? You couldn't exert power over me in private, but you will do it on here. Eh?
  12. In a sense yes. But Maya distorts what that means, and unless you have the realization yourself you won't get it. You will superimpose your conditioned mind onto it. Everyone is capable of realizing awareness. Nobody except people who follow what Leo says knows what God and devilry mean. The first thing to understand is language and conditioning and how that presents simple realization. You disclose yourself as being someone who doesn't understand language and conditioning, so you can never understand non dual awareness. That much is clear.
  13. My relative view is backed up by the upanishads. I'm happy to talk about it on here. We can start with vivekachudamini. That's the root text for understanding discrimination.
  14. Lmao. I give up, it's like a brick wall. Learn how to actually listen and assimilate what someone says. This is low level stuff that you don't even seem to have developed yet.