Preetom

@winterknight 1) In order for intense, unbroken self-inquiry to happen; is some sort of disillusionment towards the tantalizing external world necessary? I mean one can't necessarily chase the subject and some object at the same time... what are your thoughts on this? 2) This is related to the 1st question in a sense. Your 2 most recommended approaches for Enlightenment is Psychoanalysis/dynamics and Self-inquiry/Surrender. But aren't these 2 things contradictory? Psychoanalysis is the study of the categories of the mind, while self-inquiry is bypassing all categories and seeking/resting as the source of mind. So do you recommend psychoanalysis to size down the neurosis of the mind so that intense self-inquiry can begin later? I can't see how the two can go on simultaneously...

In my opinion, I think just after Enlightenment, Stoicism is the greatest way one can go in life. In fact, I really see only a minor tweak that can shift Stoicism into Non-duality. In Stoicism, there is a Nature which is accepted unconditionally and the Soul is molded according to it. Then, one fine morning, no distinction between Nature and Soul is recognized. And BAAAM!!

I heard teal swan saying that Water has huge potential to instantly raise one's vibrational frequency. No wonder taking a bath feels refreshing and good

@111111 But the point of SDS is to push push push through all distractions, pain etc over a long period until a spontaneous breakthrough or surrender happens. For an experienced meditator on flow, 30 minutes goes by in like 3-4 minutes

@111111 I came across the same claim as well. It is mostly recommended by physicians and doctors. They basically say that sitting at one place for more than 30 minutes can have adverse effects on heart, blood sugar, obesity etc especially in front of TV, computer or at work where after few minutes the mind starts getting numb. I think we all have the experience of sitting in front of tv for 3-4 hours at stretch. But I heard Sinzen Young himself saying that there are monks who have been doing this SDS for days, weeks, even for months over the centuries. Yes the legs, waist can freeze but he says that those are only temporary effects and one should come back gently out of SDS. I think we'll agree a real monk is physically far superior than any average joe, generally speaking. So who should we trust? Thousands of years old, well documented tradition or some modern medical hypothesis?

I think I forgot to quote your entire post. Eternal and afterlife cannot be equated. That which is eternal can't have an afterlife or a previous life. Those things are in time

Eternal means ''Ever-present''. Not something that lasts in 'time' forever. That is called ever-lasting. Eternal is not in time. The idea of time (past, present, future) is happening in eternity(now)

seriously? I feel like having a heart attack several times a day

@Charlotte Yup quite a long journey ahead of your niece. I guess that's the inevitable hero's journey. She has to lose herself first in order to find herself. From Pre-ego to Ego to Post-ego. I see it like this. Consciousness and Universe are never two things. But... 1) In Pre-ego(babies and animals), Consciousness is utterly lost in the flow of the Universe. No separate self. 2) Then in humans an ego is formed. A distinction between consciousness and matter is felt in one's bones. 3) Then comes Enlightenment/Post-ego. Here the Universe is utterly lost in Consciousness/Self. No separate self or object remains. Just like the Hero's journey, she comes back to basically where she started from and yet it is so qualitatively different. Such is the paradox/strange loop/full circle whatever you wanna call it

@Charlotte Great! So for whom is 'Time' relevant then? It is neither our experience nor the truth nor found by someone And yet the entire globe is caught by it's neck by this thing called time. It's interesting to contemplate on it. Reveals how pernicious and persistent the maya/dream really is and how we are literally drowned in it like a fish in the sea. No wonder self-realization is the greatest hero's journey one could ever take, where literally everything around us is working against the flow.

Do you feel yourself growing 'old' with time?

Glad you find it resonating with you

Like almost all other religions, built with good intentions but diverted to land of delusion

@Dan Arnautu ''Raising one's Consciousness'' in ruthlessly practical Enlightenment work sounds fishy and creates more confusion in the long run. In my opinion, do not use it in Enlightenment context where the default mode of inquiry is based on the ground that Only Consciousness is unchanging and primary, while everything else is only a derivative appearance. With that being said, ''Raising one's Consciousness'' in a loose and layman's term means 1) Being more and more present every single day and situations 2) Listening to one's thoughts and emotions. What message are they really carrying? Inquiring, journaling and contemplating on them. This process right here itself is a very potent one for pretty much all psychological clarity. 3) Being honest with oneself and slowly developing values and life decisions based on the above mentioned observation. Basically, going from auto-pilot to a conscious entity. At least, I prefer to use that phrase in this context.

Leo already gave a purely nondual answer. I'll share something intermediate. Hope it helps with your investigation. I think I came across this in a Ramana Maharshi Book first. I AM is like a Hybrid. Between the Absolute Awareness and dead insentient stuff called body, arises this I AM (A seemingly personal Consciousness). That's why this I AM seems to possess the quality of both, I AM is aware and also it seems to be identified with body or objects of perception, which makes it appear like a subtle sense/sensation located in the body. So the teaching says, investigate and grab hold of this I AM, divest all it's identifications and limits. Thus it loses all 'physical' qualities and revert back to shining as the pure Self(Awareness). More accurately, it is the realization that there never was a personal consciousness or I AM located in the body to begin with. I AM is really like that negative space Leo showed. It is pure space, but it also simultaneously appears like a located, square object. When all it's objectivity is subtracted through clear seeing, that negative space reverts back to infinite space. It was never a separate entity out of infinite space anyway.

(fantasy question) If everybody in the world woke up one morning and tore apart all the money, would the value of the world decrease, increase or remain the same?

@winterknight Another question related trying to do self inquiry all day. Is it helpful to ask alternative questions like, 1) Where is I, the speaker while talking 2) Where is I, the listener while listening to a lecture 3) Where is I, the doer while an activity so on..... I mean engaging in action and subtly looking for the 'subject'. Or is it better to stick to only 2-3 minimum amount of questions?

@okulele The best book I've read so far by Osho is ''Meditation the first and last freedom''. It is one of the recommended books by Shanmugam in his blog if I remember correctly. This book has many many meditation techniques, insights and almost no gossip. A very practical book to keep for lifetime and come back to it over and over again

Guys let me know what you think about this. It's about who should really carry the burden of proof. 1) A realized nondualist says that only the Self exists. Self/Consciousness is not produced or limited by the brain. He declares it without shadow of a doubt and even provides the systematic methodology to come to the same conclusion for those who want to verify it. On the other hand, the materialist scientist thinks/assumes that brain produces Consciousness but CANNOT prove it. So whose burden is it to prove? 2) Same thing goes with the material, objective, outside world. The nondualist denies such a thing. The materialist scientist believes in it but cannot prove it. So whose burden is it to prove? So my question is, is it really legitimate to bother a nondualist about proofs and assumed scientific stuff when he denies these things from the get go? Is it legitimate to bring him into an assumed paradigm and argue in order to validate that paradigm when such a paradigm just is not there? Isn't it kind of an odd, fruitless argument?

Right

Not really if I'm honest

Only from the real Non Duality! All distinctions must collapse then and we wouldn't have any conversation

@now is forever I'm not talking about any specific people here. I am mentioning a common trend here. Nonduality is it's own game. It has it's own working system and ultimately verifying that final result. I just don't get why people bring in a 'scientific' paradigm into it and declare that only when Nonduality fits the scientific paradigm, then and only then I'll acknowledge it or take it seriously. If you can't do that, then that means you're spreading some hoax. Basically, if you don't play my game in my playground, then your play is bullshit, no matter what/how you're playing. Can you conflate the knowledge of poetry, history, art etc. into objective scientific paradigm? Can you say that repeat World War I, then and only then I'll acknowledge it. Does this mean, the study of history is a hoax/woo woo? This again boils down to the core of epistemology, how can we really know anything for sure? What is the TRUTH?

Thanks for the input. Another silly analogy came up earlier. It's like I saw a pond in a dream, but I can't swim. Then I wake up and go to you who is a swimming instructor. Just when you take me to the swimming pool to teach me swimming, I scream out, ''No no no no....we have to go to the pond I saw in the dream. Then and ONLY then can you teach me how to swim and I can learn'' Isn't this same thing happening? The materialist scientist urges to start from an objective, external world...something that the Self-realized dismisses altogether from the get go. Just because you don't play inside the scientist's own playground, he denies your game altogether.

Is this ''non-objective experience'' bliss itself? Are you aware of 'it' all your waking hours? This really resonates with me. Everytime I've had lightbulb moments through self-inquiry, it always felt blissful...for absolutely no reason at all. It wasn't an experience, there was really nothing special going on. The first thought that arises is, ''oh crap! this is soo obvious. How come I ever missed it? How can I ever loose this?'' But then again, this 'stateless state' would eventually be forgotten due latent mental tendencies/Vasanas/thoughts. When you never forget that Self no matter what, is that permanent Enlightenment?