Hyperion

Foxes have holes and the birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay His head. - Matthew 8:20 - --- Bliss is not a feeling... it is the sum as well as the absence of all feelings. Bliss is not a state... it is the sum as well as the absence of all states Bliss is not even a "thing"... it is the sum as well as the absence of all things. You can be blissful and happy, blissful and sad, blissful and angry, blissful and worried, blissful and rich, blissful and poor, blissful and healthy, blissful and sick, blissful and active, blissful and lazy, blissful and noisy, blissful and silent, blissful and horny, blissful and celibate, blissful and religious, blissful and atheist, blissful and "spiritual", blissful and "not spiritual", blissful and "awake", blissful and "asleep", blissful and "blissful", blissful and "not blissful". Bliss is everything and nothing, it is everywhere and nowhere, it is always and never, it is knowable and unknowable. You cannot define it, and you cannot deny it. You cannot talk about it, and you cannot be quiet about it. You cannot grasp it, and you cannot avoid it. And if now you're feeling frustrated and pissed off because none of what I am saying seems to make any goddamn sense at all... that's also potential Bliss. That's why it is called "the peace that passes all understanding". --- Bliss is always available. You can open yourself up to it at any time... and if you don't, then that's perfectly fine too. It's your choice. And also it isn't.

Lol wut? What on earth made you think that I was in any way offended? Listen... I may be a grump, but I am not that much of a grump. 😂

Right on... just thought I'd give my old favorite record another spin, just to be safe (and because I know how much you love those spinning records, hehehe).

Cool, just checking PS: Don't let anyone tell you that "nonduality cannot be described". Of course it can be described. In fact, the word itself is already the description: Nonduality = that which does not include / is the opposite of duality. So it very obviously is a relative perspective (aka. philosophy), regardless of how much nondualists generally like to profess that it isn't.

Ok, cool. So, how is the following riposit: ...at odds with what I am saying?

And what principle would that be?

The most deceptive religion / philosophy is the one that tries to convince you that it is neither a religion nor a philosophy. I have often said that what we call a spiritual pointer is simply the expression of a relative perspective that is the opposite of whatever perspective the recipient of the pointer is currently stuck in. The moment you confuse that opposite (supposedly more "spiritual") perspective for absolute truth, you have now traded in one delusion for another. "Don't confuse the finger that points at the moon for the moon itself", as they say in Zen.

The correct answer to this question (and all other questions) is yes, no, maybe, all of the above and none of the above.

"Metaconscious" is a relative quality that can only exist in relation and contrast to "not metaconscious". The Absolute (aka. "God" / the totality of reality) has no opposite, because it is all that there is. Therefore, the Absolute must be both metaconscious and not metaconscious, and also it is neither. Hope that helps.

God feels like everything, nothing, all of the stuff in between and none of it. Because, y'know, that's what God actually is. So don't confuse "God" with some fancy-schmancy altered state. That altered state is just one potential expression or aspect of God (aka. reality), not the whole ineffable and undefinable shebang.

If that's not a wonderful example of self-contradiction, then I truly don't know what is.

As long as you don't make "no place to land" another place to (not) land, I am totally cool with that. And also, I am not.