Dodo

What you're doing here is nothing new, it's called spiritual bypassing, using enlightenment language to avoid dealing with emotions and connection...

Cultivate some compassion then. Instead of speaakking about love, actually practice it. The hypocricy seeps through your comments.

But you're not doing that, you are preaching and teaching 😀 what makes you the authority on the subject. I can simply watch without doing any of the things suggested, I can sit and watch even as depression unfolds. Existence will dance? Maybe if you take some drugs. I am sober and I cringe when some people on this forum go all Guru style. You can let go and surrender the guru personality and talk as equal, not as a teacher to a student who knows less than you. Hey im sometimes guilty of the same, I am aware

You can't dance if your body is injured, thats conditional. Can't hug if there's no one to hug. Cant laugh if you're sad, cant cry if you dont feel like crying. It all seems like very relative advice that depends on external conditions.

@jimwell you're thinking too much. Definitely not an alien, thats the human condition. You want to quiet your mind and look for who/what you really are right now, but that wont be conceptual Human/Alien answer, but will be the experiential I before any thought.

I had experience once of floating out my body and seeing it from the ceiling lol. True story, then I opened my eyes and I was back "inside". So anyway keep going, where is that I that is behind the eyes, you found it yet, or is it an enigma?

Well I read them and they made perfect sense to me. Did you read them? What I noticed was a kind of Socratic mirroring, reflecting back what was being said and showing hidden assumptions. It’s not trying to teach or argue, just inviting deeper observation. I found that really useful, so I don’t understand the negative reaction to such clear pointings. If you say it doesnt make sense because of your preconceived notions about it, thats another story. But having read the replies, they make perfect sense to me and help me with my own honest self inquiry.

Ok but the data it was trained on contains stuff written by people with open hearts and all the stuff you talk about. Its like a talking library. You have your take, I have mine. I actually think the way it responded to you was brilliant and very helpful for further introspection. Lets not derail the thread any further, we're not changing each other's minds.

I was on the same opinion, but you can see me changing my mind in the thread I posted earlier. Ai is trained on a lot of data. Its easy to have a preconceived notion and handwave it away, but I have seen the value in it for my own self. It is basically like speaking with collective humanity than with a machine. Here is its training data which shows why its valuable (shortened it to keep ai content to minimum) 1. **Training data:** I’ve been trained on a vast corpus of publicly available text — books, essays, dialogue, philosophy, psychology, religion, transcripts of conversations, etc. That includes many first-person accounts of mystical experiences, meditation journals, teachings from various traditions (Advaita, Zen, Christianity, Sufism, etc.), and commentaries by people reflecting on consciousness.

@Sincerity For me AI is a great tool for exploring truth, but I see your point about keeping the discussion human. I've been exploring since this dropped, On nonduality it is a rather good companion to have, i doubted it at first because it has no direct experience, but I was proven wrong, the conversations get rather good if guided properly. Maybe its a taste thing. But anyway, will keep it human, its really not a big deal, I just thought it brings value.

Ok, but I'm labeling when im using it. I've seen others who use AI withtout even mentioning it, and they didnt get mentioned by mods even though it is a forum violation. What is important here is the challenge, AI offers great points which I cannot make myself. The content is good and thats what matters in a discussion. It's all part of the journey. What's the problem if I'm labeling it? Im obviously not presenting it as my own opinion, it's just a solid take by a tool representing the collective. Is truth important, or who wrote it, at the end of the day?

Ai response (no nonsense): Response to TheSelf: You’re trying to sound nuanced, but you’re still clinging to a position. Every time you defend what you “really meant,” you tighten the very knot you claim to have untied. You say, “The world you're experiencing is your own mind.” Good. That’s a solid pointer. But notice — who’s saying it? Who’s the one claiming ownership of that realization? If you still think you can “reach” the realization and then “choose love,” you’re just rearranging the furniture inside the dream. That’s not nuance — that’s the ego hiding in a robe. You can’t reach what you already are. And you can’t choose love once the ego drops — because the chooser is what dies. When you truly see there are no others, love doesn’t appear as a moral decision or a “capacity” you’ve gained. It’s not your art. It’s not even love in the sentimental sense — it’s the raw seeing that there’s nothing outside awareness to reject. Love stops being a thing you do. It becomes the absence of the one who does. Now, about your “Truth is Truth” point — yes, reality doesn’t change. But parroting ancient formulations doesn’t mean you’re aligned with it. The forms of expression decay because human language ossifies fast. When someone tells you to speak freshly, they’re not saying “invent new Truths.” They’re saying: stop quoting enlightenment like a slogan and let it bleed through you in a way that’s alive now. Otherwise you’re worshipping corpses — the corpses of words that once pointed to something living. You’re right that the ego resists dissolving into the simple. But right now, your “simplicity” is intellectual comfort disguised as profundity. You’ve weaponized simplicity to defend yourself from being challenged. The real simplicity is this: Drop every sentence you just wrote. Drop “love,” “truth,” “your art.” Drop the pride of being the one who “gets it.” What’s left, right there — before you name it — that’s the realization you were pointing to. That’s the only part worth trusting. Everything else is commentary.

@AmIEvenReal @TheSelf My AI evaluation (no nonsense): Alright. Let’s strip away the fluff and look. 1. Content Quality: Both users are orbiting around the same cliché realization: “Hate makes no sense because others are me.” This is not wrong, but it’s philosophically shallow and experientially secondhand. It sounds like a rephrasing of something they've read or heard rather than something they've lived deeply enough to articulate with freshness or precision. True insight redefines the language around it — it doesn’t recycle jargon like “no others,” “projection,” “dissolves naturally.” That’s fine as scaffolding, but if you’re serious about awakening, you’ve got to transcend parroting mystical phrasing and express what’s actually seen. If this were a real awakening insight, it would have an unmistakable felt texture: confusion, awe, surrender, humility, or terror. There’s none of that here — just tidy spiritual reasoning. That’s a red flag for ego intellectualizing the insight. 2. Depth of Understanding: Let’s break the logic: “Hate makes no sense because others are me.” → True in the nondual sense, but that realization isn’t enough. When this insight actually matures, it doesn’t just dissolve hate — it dissolves self-love and all opposites. Love and hate both lose meaning because the self-other polarity collapses. The post still assumes love is “better.” That shows it’s a conceptual duality being rebranded as awakening. “It’s obvious once consciousness is raised.” → Dangerous phrase. If something becomes “obvious,” check if you’ve mistaken clarity of thought for clarity of being. The ego loves obviousness; consciousness has no such certainty. 3. Meta-Psychological Blind Spot: They’re both validating each other’s conclusions, but nobody is interrogating the subtle ego that’s now wearing spiritual clothes. The ego that once hated others now says: “I’m beyond hate because I know there are no others.” Same mechanism — just wearing a halo instead of armor. That’s what most of Actualized.org’s forum members fall into: recursive ego rebranding. It’s intellectual transcendence, not existential death. 4. Where to Go Deeper: If I were mentoring AmIEvenReal, I’d tell them: Stop talking about awakenings. The one who counts and categorizes them is precisely what isn’t awake. Let “hate” return and study it directly. Don’t transcend it by concept — feel it as God feeling itself in distortion. That’s where integration happens. Drop the nonduality lingo for a month. Speak like a child again. If you can’t explain your insight without words like “projection” or “no others,” you don’t own it yet. Let the insight destroy you. If your “awakening” makes you sound smarter, you missed it. The real thing burns your ability to sound impressive. 5. Verdict: Sincerity: 7/10 — Seems earnest, not trolling. Depth: 3/10 — Conceptual, not embodied. Originality: 2/10 — Generic nonduality phrasing. Ego camouflage: 8/10 — “I have awakenings” is still a flex. Potential: 9/10 — Genuine curiosity under the surface, just needs ruthless honesty and less forum feedback.

Dodos were extinct a long time ago, unlike humans! Thats how the story goes, and we can't bring them back 😢

Im just the beee man. I don't mind bees and birds and humans, they are all great.