The0Self

You can't. That's the point. It's undefined, just like truth. Love just means no separation / nothing mattering.

Yes the "infinite love experience" is an experience. But what I refer to as love is not what you're referring to. You're referring to a love that accepts everything to an extremely high degree. When love accepts fully (which is already the case), there's no one experiencing that love -- cessation. Impersonal love is not an experience.

These could be conceived of as valuable: The body is liberated from the tyranny of the me. The me is liberated from the need to defend what doesn't belong to it -- the body always seeks safety, but it's not your (someone's) body. Existential questions no longer perturb the innate peace of being. But pointing out there's no me is an inefficient method for awakening, and indeed not intended as a method. It has its place, but from the perspective of the message of no me, listening to the message is equally as useless as anything else. If you are seeking peace and happiness, you might as well enjoy it; meditate, etc. The only reason to listen to the nonduality message would be entertainment and fun. And when it's just constantly pointed out when people aren't even asking for it, it's probably a useless activity -- for the benefit of the one delivering the message.

When there is no thing or circumstance that should or shouldn’t happen, then there is no place and no time where you should or shouldn’t be. ❤️

Something would need to exist outside of everything for there to be a limitation on it, which is by definition not possible. The map is not the territory anyway though. There’s no ultimate limit and in fact it is inconceivable that there is one unless you just ignore the word ultimate.

1. Okay, so... Love is the only thing that accepts everything (itself) fully. 2. Truth is the only thing that accepts everything (itself) fully. Both true? If yes, then love = truth. Not personal love — impersonal, unconditioned love.

Probably. Personal love. Didn't watch it but I'd imagine that's what he meant.

Still can’t get over how true the Drake and Josh theme song is ?

Desires like “wanting to eat this” still appear in liberation. But it’s then just a desire, not a need. Maybe we mean the same thing overall but mean different things by the word desire — in the way I think of desire, all desires coming to an end would basically imply that getting chased by a tiger would not be followed by running-away ? — that would still happen. Desires and aversions of the body are no longer holding happiness ransom, that’s all. Nothing is personal.

@taotemu Yes, but it’s the hope/desire for something better/greater which ends (simply because it’s not needed) — desires still happen, as they too are an essential part of the aforementioned perfection.

Wise; ^^ that is true in a sense — but get this, it is for that reason that the real power comes with the ability to produce as much joy (or bliss; peace; etc) as you want at any time. You don’t need to maintain anything! Also, there’s wholesome joy that has no cost in the way you describe — in fact it invigorates you further. And the following may be a bit harder to accept: even the lows can be appreciated and even enjoyed, in a way, for what they are, basically every bit as much as the highs.

? Yeah a while back I went like a whole year of basically never even listening to music while driving alone — I’d just listen to one of those 2 channels, a meditation audiobook, or dharmaseed, etc. Utterly engulfed in spirituality ? And I did a whole lot of driving too!

? I also like to view the mazes as all fitting together perfectly — and the apparent divide between every instance of any two of them is nothing more than the exact same singular “intention” (Goodness). So there’s no separation at all.

Obviously, by definition. But I was directly answering your question, not making a general claim; you entirely misunderstood my point: Imagine being so imperturbably happy, at peace, and overflowing with causeless joy, that you no longer dream of wasting time thinking about getting more of it, since at any time, you can have as much of it as you want. If you think that’s not possible, well you’re simply about as far off as you could possibly be. Happiness is your nature and your birthright. Q: "...what's the percentage of progress you made in this grand project..." A: Immeasurably vast; total. If you are uninterested in as much bliss as you want, any time you want it, that's perfectly fine -- I can totally understand and respect that. Maybe you genuinely don't care about it, and that seriously is great! But IF the only reason you're uninterested is that you believe it's not possible for you? Well, all I'm doing is suggesting that's simply a false belief.

Two manifestations of paths, abbreviated: A. recognize true nature and then allow that to dissolve egoic habits over a course of (usually) several years, or B. dissolve egoic habits over a course of (also usually) several years until true nature is unavoidably recognized.

True! But there’s also no me to have its own nonexistence in the first place.

Which is literally precisely the reason there’s no suggestion that one should do something other than seek — that would assume someone could either do that or not do that.

Sure, however: (a section of what I just posted in a thread in the politics section...) Unconditional love creates (appears as) character-structures (we could conceive of each individual as a unique maze) which unconditional love can explore through. The structure can have all sorts of challenges and impediments and imperfections — this is responsible for and indeed necessary for the diversity and uniqueness of beings. However, at every step, each and every intention is literally the expression of unconditional love, which is perfect. It is only the maze which appears as imperfection, so any judgement of choices in that maze is actually just a judgement of the maze itself — since, at all times, every single choice is always just love... love choosing the most loving choice (it just can seem like a terrible choice if the maze dictates it to). So not only are all intentions good, they’re hopelessly unable to be anything other than perfect. If you want to call the appearance of the maze God, then sure, depending on who you ask, God is imperfect. But there is only love — no need to call it God. It’s completely impersonal. In order for something to be other than love, it has to be viewed personally, but love is impersonal.

@BlackPhil Yeah I agree with everything you said pretty much. And yes I had those experiences. Also past-life experiences. Wasn’t claiming there isn’t a Law of One style reincarnation game in play somehow, it’s just that it’s not really relevant for awakening, and further revelations of unconditional love and no separation (quite beyond mere past-life experiences) prompted me to somehow talk about how rebirth is not the ultimate truth anyway, regardless of how relatively true it is.

@Hulia Your responses are perfectly rational on the level at which you’re speaking. But hear me out... Also to anyone else who might not understand or agree with the sentiment that everyone acts with good intentions, I don’t know if this will help, but it’s the clearest way I can express it: Unconditional love creates (appears as) character-structures (we could conceive of each individual as a unique maze) which unconditional love can explore through. The structure can have all sorts of challenges and impediments and imperfections — this is responsible for and indeed necessary for the diversity and uniqueness of beings. However, at every step, each and every intention is literally the expression of unconditional love, which is perfect. It is only the maze which appears as imperfection, so any judgement of choices in that maze is actually just a judgement of the maze itself — since, at all times, every single choice is always just love... love choosing the most loving choice (it just can seem like a terrible choice if the maze dictates it to). So not only are all intentions good, they’re hopelessly unable to be anything other than perfect. The intention to “make intentions better” is of course perfect as well — however, in that case you’d really just be making alterations to the maze! Not the intentions! The intention literally is fixed at perfect.

Death is simply the end of separation beliefs. Which also happens to be what complete enlightenment is. It is not tethered to being highly conscious, though it can seem to relate somewhat. The only reason we associate death with bodily failure is the intuition that our remaining beliefs of separation may likely fall away at that time. Can’t say I see a big difference between an enlightened person dying and any other person dying — the remaining separation beliefs of the latter could perhaps somehow stay in tact but I don’t see why they would... and even if that leads to an associated rebirth or prolonged dissolution, first of all I don’t know how the beliefs would still be intact, and second of all if rebirth happened and there was no memory of the previous life, did rebirth really even occur? It’s a total story because it’s unfalsifiable whether that’s already the case — in fact in that exact case it would be nonsensical. There’s no separation anyway.

Seeking enlightenment = wanting to know what the absence of knowing is like. Still, that doesn’t mean one should do something other than seek.

The simple reason for why it’s a misunderstanding to even wonder about whether reincarnation occurs or not: If you do reincarnate, that means you’re already reincarnated right now. Assuming you don’t already know that you’re a reincarnation, how does reincarnation actually happen in a meaningful way? You wouldn’t know it. There’s just life/God. It can also be directly recognized that the difference between reincarnation and no-reincarnation is not even merely imaginary, but completely nonsensical.

As long as there’s stillness, transformation, bright alertness, and bliss, you don’t need to tweak anything you’re currently doing — otherwise, you perhaps could. Researching the jhanas can be useful if you come across any sticking points or profound states that scare you and render you unsure of how to proceed — Daniel Ingram gets into probably the most technical detail of anyone; Rob Burbea provided complete info on it as well. Many other sources for kundalini progression. The gist of it can be found in Culadasa’s TMI. Keep on doing your practice though. Sounds like it’s going very well. Tailoring and tweaking your practice with increasing subtlety is the name of the game; a very beautiful part of practice. Perhaps begin with openness, and then develop each of the following: steadiness, sensitivity, patience, and play.

Fair enough. But come on...that’s clearly not the context I was using “imagination” in ? — I could have just as easily said “it’s quite obvious/clear” instead of “I’d imagine,” at least in regard to most people (I would have to add the word “most” or at the very least “many” in that case). On second thought, maybe I wasn’t clear. I was referring to the people who say you didn’t die when you died and came back, not to the people such as yourself who claim they died and came back. Guess I can see why it wasn’t clear. Btw I died and came back in the way you’re likely meaning as well.