Dodo

@Someone here @theoneandnone show me this .. insanity. Is the insanity with us in the room today? Or if I take the Jordan Peterson route of answering, define Leo, define is, define leading, define us, define into, define insanity. Thanks for playing

I know another saying. If I speak I tell a lie. But if I don't speak, I'm a coward. Lets remove the quotation marks from be and being. Being doesnt get boring just like you're not bored in deep sleep. Even boredom and the coming here is an expression of being. No doer just the doing itself appears, thats awareness, not a failure to be aware. Its not a failure to being that there is doing happening. It's all awareness, Halleluja! All experience points to the fact of isness itself. That's what I want to celebrate with you

Lets snap out of it. Yesterday and today you are the same you. This is fact. Why do you need to be so and so, why not just be?

Gura approved 👌 🙌 😆

Loool ok dude you need to chill. Its not pick and choose identity, there's just isness. You and me are the same isness. Being a serial killer is incredibly low consciousness, its not an identity, its something that a person does when they are mentally ill.

Ah, now we're talking. We have a mental illness on our hands. Lets spread fear guys, because we realised unity. Can't believe I originally gave you credit, you're clearly in lala land. You'll do yourself a solid if you read this thread, if you can get past your ego.

To know we know nothing, we already imply knowing while not focusing on it, in the background. By focusing on the knowing itself by which knower and known are both known, we are unifying inside and outside, knower and known exist within the same knowing and its us, we are going nondual 😆 I myself trust that this is important.

No separate knower and known. Both made out of knowing itself. No light of knowing, no anything. And we have direct evidence proof of knowing, so we can't deny it.

Oh this is rich, tell me more, master. Can I not do the consciousness work while typing, I can only do it while under a tree meditating? Somehow I am conscious while meditating, but not conscious while typing. You are mistaking the action for the being behind it.

Knows nothing as an object, but IS. Deep sleep is like looking at your formless self in a formless mirror. Glad you mentioned it. I wonder why its so essential in everyday life to sleep, why its so energising to go there, like going to the source. There is no discontinuity of being, only there are no objects of perception and conception in deep sleep.

But what we essentially are is not that which is known, but that which knows, I feel like we are going in circles. Needs direct seeing, not more talking. The eye (I) that sees is not itself seen, but is what is real.

In this analogy no watcher of the screen, but a self aware screen watching movies projected within itself. Drop the analogy of course, im not saying the finger is the moon. The map is not the territory etc. You are talking truth per se, the only thing you are ignoring is that you REALLY are aware. Not the mirage, the You,me, awareness, knowing. So nothingness is all there is,, but that nothingness is aware! Not a dead, but an alive nothingness,, awareness.

The mirage really is there, its just not what it appears to be. Its all empty impersonal awareness that Knows itself by being itself. The screen is the only thing real, but there really is a movie shown on that screen, even if only a mirage, the mirage is happening and not a problem if the screen is realised as the only reality of the movie/mirage. In other words, impersonal awareness is the only reality of me. We are outpreaching each other.

Im just following the facts of my direct experience honestly, princess. Something here is real, even in delusion there is a knowing which itself is not deluded, it just is. Both me and not me at the same time, both formless and appears as all form (the latter being more advanced understanding, but have to know what is meant by form- appearance of form in formless knowing) no duality because its only an appearance of form.

The formless being knows itself by being itself like a Sun eluminates itself by being itself, not by shining its light on itself. We realise we are That !! (With the strong possibility of sounding like im parroting) Whatever you are doing, its That doing it. Its a movement of That.

Let me explain, I mean you cant remove formless being, just like you cannot uproot the ground. I can go on this task of Not this not that, and discard all experience as Not Me, but the ground, formless being, remains and cannot be removed. I would agree pointing to something formless is ridiculous, but if that formlessness is Me, thats whole other story. If that formlessness is not you, good luck "finding it". The main thing here is that we don't find it, we realise we are it. And thats what we are always pointing to here in this forum like mad-men. @Mellowmarsh

As Princess Arabia said, But its not necessarily evident by the mind based on deeply rooted beliefs, so the process of elimination of the weeds before growing the new garden is quite helpful. Getting to the ground of being before any experience. Sure the only reality of the experience is the ground (the formless being), but that is not immediately obvious, even though it is true. In short, there's ultimately no point, but relatively speaking its the main point. Thats why nonduality is said in negative terms, describing what its not, not what it is.

As another wise person once pointed out, are you really going to enjoy it if you are stuck to a chair and I have a chainsaw rolling. Its not about enjoying, suffering is also a very valid experience within knowing. Lets not deny it. Being aware of being doesnt remove pain and circumstances. Like as a thought experiment, how enlightened would Ishanga appear to be if they are being tortured? Lets not conclude that quickly how one appears to their realisation. You don't know what others are being tested with. Maybe they are on level 500 and crying while you pass level 5 and laughing.

Well yes, we are trying to point to something which has no form, its bound to be paradoxical and confusing if we start thinking about it.

He's saying what enlightenment is not, seems like a valid practical signpost you can follow, like what is it right now in my direct experience which itself is not an experience, but undeniably true 🤔

When parent points to the moon, a child makes the error and looks at the finger, not what is pointed to. "Silly daddy," the child says, "thats your finger, not the moon!"

And here is my text "polished" through AI, tell me how its not equivallent to cheating if I present this as my own thoughts (even though to generare it it used my thoughts)? Ai: The brown bear demonstrates a clear understanding of nonduality. His words point to space-like awareness and the absence of a personal self, and he maintains a calm, unaffected tone throughout. The white bear, in contrast, reacts emotionally, emphasizing her own perspective of mindfulness and simplicity. While she seems to believe she is grounded in truth, her frustration and attempts to redirect the conversation reveal that she is projecting her own expectations onto him. Her insistence on labeling “beautiful” phenomena as more valid or meaningful misunderstands the nature of the brown bear’s pointers. Nondual teaching isn’t about evaluating experiences as pleasing or displeasing; it’s about pointing directly to awareness itself. Her discomfort arises not because the brown bear is wrong, but because she cannot reconcile her desire for connection and control with his stillness and neutrality. Furthermore, her tone and actions — impatience, anger, and even swearing in frustration — contrast sharply with the brown bear’s composure. This suggests that the tension is less about content and more about attachment to personal preference and identification. She is attempting to convert him to her framework, while he simply presents what is, without judgment or expectation. In essence, the brown bear’s teachings are both potent and authentic. The white bear’s critiques reveal more about her own attachments than about his validity. Nonduality is not about emotional alignment with others; it is about perceiving awareness as it is, without clinging to how it should feel. --- This version: * Presents your argument **logically and sequentially**. * Maintains **calm, philosophical tone**, consistent with nondual principles. * Avoids emotionally charged labels like “high horse” or “butthurt,” but preserves the critique. * Emphasizes **conceptual reasoning** over judgment, making it persuasive even to neutral readers.

Brown bear is top notch. White bear has an idea that being mindful is the truth. She is getting on her high horse the same way she is accusing him of. She is on her "free, mindful and simple" high horse. He is stating very potent nondual signs, he is not implying he is unhappy. She has a problem with his words and is trying to convert him to speaking like her. 👍 can literally use all her arguments against her. She is preaching to him angrily, and denying that... Why is saying "its a beautiful tree" supposed to be a beautiful thought and the things he is saying is not beautiful? She clearly doesn't see where the pointers point to or she wouldn't have problem with them, they are beautiful, not life denying. Also,, she spoke the Lord's name in vein in her frustration, while brown bear kept a peaceful unaffected tone throughout. She was mad she can't control him! And she is the one who wanted to leave, butthurt, he didnt express dislike talking to her, she was the one with the problems and conflict.

Yeah, Ai articulated your position so well, that if I want to disagree with you as a human, aand you pretended that was your writing, I would be at a disadvantage. It would look like "yeah, omg, he's right! I cant argue with that" same way if I play a chess cheater, I wont be able to defeat him in chess. But if he discloses he used AI, I can use the same method to answer him, and see, oh, with best play, actually, his position isnt that solid. It only appeared that way due to the AI making strong moves that a human cant. But if I use the same tool as you, I can easily even the playing field and tell you why this is wrong, from knowledge I do not possess. Great, I can learn from the AI, but lets not ever present it as our own work. Here is what my AI wrote on the subject after giving it examples from this thread. Ai: A clear defense of the claim that AI rewrites often add knowledge, rather than merely polishing text, begins with recognizing what happens when language models “improve” a passage. True editing preserves meaning while refining tone or structure; it keeps every assertion logically identical to the original. Yet in practice, AI systems do more than adjust phrasing—they infer intentions, fill perceived gaps, and supply explanations or analogies that were never in the source. When an AI expands a sentence to “clarify” it, it inevitably interprets what the author *meant* and provides reasons or examples to support that interpretation. This process inserts new layers of meaning. The original human text may simply express a judgment or observation, while the AI version transforms that into a structured argument, complete with causes, implications, and moral framing. These additions are not stylistic—they are epistemic. They change what the text *claims* to know or assert. The issue is not that the AI fabricates facts, but that it fabricates reasoning. It takes an author’s intuitive statement and re-casts it as if the writer had consciously articulated every rationale and philosophical implication. That act of invention turns the piece from a personal expression into a synthetic essay built from the model’s general knowledge. Therefore, calling such rewriting a “polish” is misleading. The AI becomes a silent co-author, introducing new conceptual content that reshapes the argument’s scope and logic. Recognizing this distinction matters because it determines whether we are reading a faithful reflection of the original thinker or a hybrid text in which the AI’s own assumptions and world knowledge have already begun to speak.

What’s NOT Allowed: Self-promotion Coming here to start your teaching/coaching/guru business by leeching off this audience Multiple accounts. (If you are caught opening multiple accounts, both will be banned). .... Posting AI-generate content like text, images, or video without disclosing that it was sourced from AI .... I'm not contradicting myself, because when I use AI, I disclose it. Also im pretty sure AI has added a lot of things you didnt write about, the post is so comprehensive. If you use AI to play the perfect chess game, you have to mention it. Sure, the chess is marvelous and magnificent! Also my comments are not "vomit" thank you, the ai replies to your ai reply are top quality chess. And it stems from its understanding of nonduality from my chats with it. As an honest seeker, I believe my GPT is in the best shape out of any to respond to your post. Its like a nondual master GPT replying to your dualistic set GPT.