Ananta

Also, in case it wasn't clear, I was referring to using concepts in understanding "apparent" phenomena in my past post. The cosmology of the manifest universe. When you've done your time in negating the world long enough you start to eventually question the other side of the coin, manifestation.. that's what I'm referring to. That's what I mean by coming full circle. The realization that Mithya is also awareness, therefore also "The Self". Ultimately though all theories are discarded when the mind becomes calm and still, when questions/doubts are gone, then you just rest in your true nature and play your role in life. The only other time to bring it up is in discussion. Like on this forum for example.

Perhaps, your just not to the point I'm referring to yet..no problem. Understanding seems to come in phases and you can't jump to a phase your not yet at.

@Joseph Maynor ya know what just came to me ... once you've negated everything and apprehend your true nature. Eventually, you come full circle and realize everything you've negated is also you (awareness). That's when "concepts" really come in handy. So, that this "apparent" existence can somewhat be explained..to the mind. As its the mind that seeks answers. Sorry, if I'm beating a dead horse..lol.

@Natasha yeah, after I asked I figured you couldn't summarize in a post..lol. I guess I'm really not searching/looking for anything anymore, Vedanta answered my questions, so I don't have the motivation to listen. But, Im somewhat curious as to what he's saying since people mention it often. So, I'll try to catch the infinity one, when I have a chance. Thanks.

@Joseph Maynor yeah, I have apprehended my true nature years ago. That can't really be talked about, I've never even tried, to be honest, because it's thought-less. All we can do is point.

So, how does one talk about reality without another saying it's concept, when concept, by definition, is a thought or notion in the mind? See the problem?

@Joseph Maynor I'm kinda sorry I asked ..lol. Over my head! Do you talk like this because of your background in philosophy? Or am I just not up on the "don't talk concept" spiritual game? I must admit I don't get it, so please excuse my concepts in the future.

Hey, not to nit pick, but for whatever reason I start thinking how you say the phrase above very often. So, I looked up the definition- Concept- something conceived in the mind : thought, notion Aren't all words, combinations of words a "concept"? A thought/notion conceived within the mind that is then communicated? What are you referring to when you say concept? You have said it to me more then once, that's why I'm inquiring into this more.

@Natasha I don't watch Leo's vids, not that I'm against them or anything. I might out of curiousity if they weren't 60-90 min. long and I don't have the time. Anyways, what did you gather from these vids your referencing? Do you know anything about the cosmology taught in Vedanta and was it that that?

@Joseph Maynor oh, btw, when I used the word "me/I/you" I was referring to awareness. Not the "apparent" person I/we appear to be. Sorry, if that caused any confusion.

The experiencer is also part of Mithya.

Oh, sorry this is happening to you. This has happened to me in the past, emotional stuff just bubbling up out of nowhere (also not while meditating). I just sat with it, noticed it, didn't get caught up in a thought story about it and it would just resolve. Cry, scream, whatever..if it helps. Think of it as the unconscious mind purging itself. You are the "witness", of the purging, as long as you don't identify with it.

Things can just bubble up during meditation. You could just remain the witness/watcher OF it, instead of identifying with it. Sounds like something might be causing you to be anxious during your session? Are you trying to hard to get somewhere with it?

@Joseph Maynor It could be looked at different ways. One way is that anything phenomenal is awareness, meaning it's made out of/from pure awareness, so it's "not different" from pure awareness, in that sense. However, it is also "not the same" as it is Mithya (illusion), because it's always changing, temporary and inert. Pure awareness is never changing, always present and permeates every thing. It's the illuminating factor or principle that causes inert phenomena to become active/enlivened. So, you could say the world is me, but I am not the world. Another words, you can't be the world, because you are aware OF the world, but the world is you, awareness.

..and paradoxically your entire post was made out of combinations of words, so you could make your point.

Well, thank you. All teachings (including Leo's) are inherently dualistic, because the nature of language is dualistic. Even when someone says they have no perspective, that IS a perspective.

With all due respect, you ask tons of questions on this forum. Do you always just want neutral answers? Or are you looking to see if someone may have insights you may not have discovered yet? ..which may mean they have a point of view on the matter?... I have points of views on topics from 8 years of reading, self inquiry, meditation, videos, emails to teachers, ect. Why must I have a "neutral" outlook, if I know otherwise? That makes no sense. I'm not referring to this thread or my past post on here, but just in general. What is everyone so damn afraid of?

When did I say that? I said, "apparently there is no answer to "why"" and also said, "According to everything I've read that is a question that can't be answered." Then I said, " If you figure it out let me know". In summary, I have not found an answer in all these years. The gurus/masters (and Vedanta) I've read all say there is no answer to this question. So, I assume there isn't one, but I did say if YOU find one let me know.

@Joseph Maynor Hi, apparently there is no answer to "why", unfortunately. According to everything I've read that is a question that can't be answered. If you figure it out let me know..haha. Anyways, think of it like we are playing hide and seek with ourself.

They don't really feel those emotions like others do... It only appears such for the people who are watching them.. All the liberated person feels is ups and downs in energy, and a little bit of subtle sensations... In other words, their emotions are not really like the emotions of people who are unconscious. Emotions of people who are unconscious are very solid, opaque and they get powered by thoughts and emotions back and forth for a while.. Emotions of liberated ones are like tiny bits of distant clouds which disappear without any effort. I would feel hesitant to even call them as emotions.. @Shanmugam You were "correcting" what I said (is this fault finding to you?...hmmm)... This was your first response to me in this thread. So, when you say- "You started it by finding a fault in my post.. " That's actually not true. You started it. My subsequent response to you in this thread, was in regards to your post above. Where I simply said "pleasure and pain persist after Moksha" and you have become completely bent out of shape over it. Even though your very next post was- " I didn't say pain and pleasure doesn't persist... Read my post again" ?

Yes, it is and yes, it does.

Yes, It took 8 years...searching in the wrong places didn't help. Also, the times of falling unconscious again for awhile, until the trusty suffering aspect awakened me again. I remember many years ago, on another forum asking, "how do you stay awakened?" A long term member was giving me advice and I said, "No, you misunderstand" ...I don't remember this stuff "at all" for weeks at a time..lol. Suffering always brought me back, eventually.

You don't need it for the initial recognition, but you do to "assimilate" that Self-knowledge. Especially, if you have questions/doubts and most do. That's why after 6 1/2 yrs of neo-advaita crap I turned to Vedanta.

This ^^^ right here. Now, you have my answer. You referenced how could I know for 100% certain.... when did I say 100% certain? When? Please post the quote where I say for 100% certain, if you think such quote exists, of course it doesnt. You've made a huge deal over 3 sentences I wrote in a post.

You wanted to know where I was coming from with what I say...and I told you. When did you say to imagine a situation?