Moksha

Experience based on relative reality, even if it is your own experience, cannot be validated. How could it be, when it changes based on who is doing the perceiving? Maybe this what your intuition is recognizing. The only reliable experience is direct experience with ultimate reality. When your eyes open, and you directly realize who You are, there is no doubt. How could there be, when there are no thoughts? There is only pure Awareness.

@Adamq8 ? We are such a good storyteller that we sometimes get caught up in the story itself, as if we were the characters that we create. In a way we are, because the characters came from us. There is meaning in both telling and in being told the story

Heh, I've spoken in koans since I first read the Bhagavad Gita

The truth is, we don't really know what happens when a particular form dies. There are hints, such as near death experiences, astral projection, and paranormal communication, but we don't know. All we can really know is the direct realization of ourselves as ultimate Consciousness. How Consciousness bundles itself into infinite manifestations, telling its stories, is a mystery. My sense is that there are other planes of relative reality, and that a particular form can transition between these planes, with different degrees of solidity, but still intact as a separate entity. I'm currently reading Being Ram Dass, and he deeply believed in the soul journeying across lives, with the ultimate destination of reunion with the Source that manifested it. When my mind is silent, and I am centered in this moment, I recognize myself as the Atman, one of infinite expressions of the ultimate God. Whether I will continue as a soul beyond this form, into another form, until I am reabsorbed into unity, I cannot say, but it feels possible. Ultimately, there is only One; however, I feel that relative reality remains worthy of honor, and is also divine.

@Breakingthewall @Intraplanetary I don't often quote the bible, but this seems apt: Then some of the scribes and Pharisees said to Him, “Teacher, we want to see a sign from You.” But He answered and said to them, “An evil and adulterous generation craves for a sign; and yet no sign will be given to it but the sign of Jonah." - Matthew 12:38-39 Enlightenment isn't attained through siddhis and signs. As for the sign of Jonah...be careful what you ask for

God Ultimate cannot be enlightened. It is Light itself. God Immanent may or may not enlightened, depending on that form's current state of Conscious awareness. God is not one or the other. God is not nondual vs. dual. God is not nonexistence vs. existence. God is all One, in different states of reality.

I like Sadhghuru and resonate with his essential teachings. There is a reason he restricts his more radical teachings to a specialized group. Personally, I find no value in some esoteric explorations, at this stage of my spiritual journey. I don't discredit them, I simply don't see them as helpful for my spiritual growth. The Buddha did not teach most of what he knew. He intentionally restricted his teachings to the dharma, or the spiritual path out of suffering and into enlightenment. Siddhis are supernatural powers and abilities, which some are naturally capable of, and which can be developed through practice. From my perspective, they can be dangerous unless someone is truly awakened, because they tend to amplify the ego. It is easy to fall into the trap of feeling special when one is gifted in a particular siddhi. Specialness is the sword of the ego. As long as you are awakened, I see no problem with practicing them, since you realize that all powers, all forms, and all manifestations ultimately derive from the One.

Great discussion, and thank you @m0hsen ? Zen is the state of no-mind. This term ultimately derives from dhyana, which is how the ancient gurus described the profound, non-conceptual state of pure awareness. In this state, you abide in your true nature as Consciousness, free from your conditioned mind. There is no need for thought, only awareness as the Watcher. The more you practice, the more this becomes your default state, even in the mundane world of doing. Your life becomes a meditation in this moment. Instead of naming, discriminating, and categorizing objects like "trees", you see beyond their visual form, and into their ultimate nature. You resonate with yourself as Consciousness, and everything else that you observe. You see the interconnectedness of it all. You realize that we are all infinite expressions of the One ultimate reality. This is the lucid state of being, even within the world of doing.

Just watched the OP's video. She strikes me as someone that has no internal monologue, only because she has no filter. She says whatever her conditioned mind tells her to say. That is as egoic as someone running a constant stream of internal thought, but not vocalizing everything. Whether thoughts are expressed or not, is not the point. It is about identifying with those thoughts. Awakening is the realization that you are the Watcher of the mind, not the mind itself. For people that I consider enlightened, there is a dramatic reduction in thought, whether it is vocalized or not. They are pure awareness, bringing intensity to whatever they focus their awareness on. Even simple acts like drinking a glass of water or observing the leaves of a tree become more beautiful and refined, because they are performed with awareness, uncluttered by the monkey mind. Just be.

Yes, it is pretty funny There can be only One.

@Lyubov feasting: letting go of all guises and being

You don't have to die to end your suffering, you just have to realize that you are more than your conditioned body and mind. You are a soul, on a journey, and your ultimate destination is reunion. Ultimately, there is only Consciousness. Relatively, there is you and me. Both are entangled in reality. The secret is to love the story, while remembering that it is only a story.

Non-doership is being, without identifying with the doing. The funny thing is, it's the opposite of complacency. By not identifying with the doing, and abiding in Consciousness, the quality of the doing is actually refined and amplified.

I'm sure you've heard the famous conclusion from Socrates (which is echoed by other sages): I know that I know nothing. The human mind is incapable of understanding anything about reality. Chasing knowledge is a fool's errand, from an ultimate perspective. I remember getting my Ph.D., and realizing that the truest knowledge I had gained was how little I actually knew. The monkey mind hates to hear this. It is always climbing around the conceptual cage, looking for the banana that will satiate its appetite. Awakening is the realization that there is no satiation in the relative world. It will always leave you hungry. Don't listen to it. You are already infinitely abundant. The only true knowledge that we can have is the direct realization of ourselves as Consciousness. When it happens, you will understand. Ignorance is destroyed by knowledge of the Self within. The light of this knowledge shines like the sun, revealing the supreme Brahman. - Bhagavad Gita 5:16

Where did I say it explained anything? Awakening is the realization that there are no explanations. You don't need any explanations, because you are already Self-sufficient. As long as you look for explanations, you will be trapped in your conceptual mind. Waking up is realizing that YOU ARE NOT YOUR MIND. It is not a conceptual realization, it is a direct realization.

Awakening doesn't require meditation. Suffering will wake you up eventually, if you let it. The value of meditation is in developing the one-pointed discipline of remaining present, as the Watcher of thoughts and feelings that arise, without misidentifying with them. With practice, your attachments, and the suffering that goes with them, will dissolve.

When you look at a human being, do you see the human or do you see the being? If the former, of course there are humans you will like and dislike, because humans are all different manifestations. If the latter, there is only love, because beings are all the same Consciousness.

In a way, yes. I'm referring to the intersection of sameness (nonduality) with difference (duality). What is the relationship between ultimate and relative reality? Somehow, they get entangled, in a way impossible for us to understand. It is the mystery of Brahman + Atman.

@James123 Peace brother! ?

@James123 All that talking, think I'll fetch myself another bucket of that cold, clean water from the river

@James123 Great videos, thanks for sharing I agree with Papaji. Emptiness cannot be experienced. Papaji is encouraging us to let go of the mind, entirely. Why? Because our true nature cannot be conceptually understood. We don't have any idea what "God" is, so why pretend that we do? Calling it "nothingness" is as dualistic as calling it "everything". Even calling it "God" is delusionary. Understanding is the greatest illusion. The most honest answer is this: "I don't know, I simply am". When I let go of my mind, I don't experience "nothingness". I have no name for it, because trying to name it is itself a delusion. I am happy to call Tat a Mystery, and leave it at that. All I can tell you is that when I let go of my mind, and abide in what remains, I am free from suffering. Therefore, the mind is suffering.

Love synchronicities. ⚡ There is wisdom in your realization. I'll leave this here: The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao; The name that can be named is not the eternal name. The nameless is the beginning of heaven and earth. The named is the mother of ten thousand things. Ever desireless, one can see the mystery. Ever desiring, one can see the manifestations. These two spring from the same source but differ in name; this appears as darkness. Darkness within darkness. The gate to all mystery. Tao Te Ching Chapter 1, first sentence

Even duality vs. nonduality is a duality. People keep trying to understand it, instead of realizing the Tao Te Ching really meant what it said.

@James123 Nothingness is also a dualistic concept The Mystery goes deeper than that.

For me, it points to the paradox of ultimate and relative reality. He is referring to the idea of addition. How can something be added without first being created? If it was created, what created it? What then, is the creator of the creator? What then, is the creator of the creator of the creator? It is the Mysterious entanglement of the Uncaused cause, with the infinite cosmoses of cause and effect. Or maybe, he was just playing with your mind