Search the Community

When I first did Leo's Neti Neti I rediscovered a hyper-awareness that I had experienced when I was around 5 or 6. I remember staring out of the window for hours, pretty much meditating without realizing it. That's why they say that the kids are always in the now.

It’s the clinging, demand, volition. First we search to find out who we are, our ego or self. Then the Ego seeing that is illusory then tries to find the self ‘god’...This is the same process repeated over and is an indication of the degree of seeing and understanding that determines the extent of union with the immeasurable. It’s the same ol movement nt of attatchment and grasping for something. Psychological time ‘time bound’ movement falls way short of the timeless. The sun doesn’t need to shine on itself. Tat Tvam Asi? Don’t be a stage 5 clinger lol And remeber, neti neti

So I experienced/got it ("enlightenment") (note that I is horrible incorrect but how can I else speak?). It was free movement - yoga - walking meditation - contemplation - neti neti method - bam. Two thoughts arose which would be great to discuss. Those are 1) As life from the "I" perspective is quite difficult, working on permanent awareness of nothing is the only work which can bring peace? 1.1) Can only this focus dissolve this endless illusion? 2) Who am I asking? Who is this "I" asking ? 3) So noone has done nothing ever..!? 4) Why are there teachers and books etc. about that? "Everyone" who gets enlightend knows that there is actually no one to teach. In teaching they´d succumb to their "I" perception and its desires of whatever sort. So people who live within society and are enlightened try to make this dream as nice as possible for "them"? As there is nothing like "a person", "my" enlightenment is the only real one but another person will say:" no my enlightenment is the only real one", why would he say that? Why would the experience talk to the "I" perception to have an interaction between them? 5) What´s the reason for this thing called "perception, experience, nothingness perceiving the perceiver/ being the perceiver- status)? 6) I am Confused/Shocked/Freed and I feel like someone who was forced to watch 10 years of television straight without blinking.

@dude neti neti is for beginners I need something much more advanced.

Change your life change your thoughts goes into the Toa Te Ching. Explains it very carefully it is nice. I really like neti neti meditation. It is small but packs a big punch.

@hundreth Don't check Wikipedia to know what Buddha taught... If you want to know what Buddha taught, directly refer to the source, the Pali Canon. All the suttas from Pali canon are here: https://www.accesstoinsight.org Buddha actually explained how our feelings, thoughts, perceptions are not self. There is a difference between 'no self' and 'not self'.. The source of anatta doctrine from Buddhism is actually from Anatta Lakkhana Sutta, which is the second discourse he gave, according to Pali canon. Here is how it goes: Not that when Buddha says 'consciousness is not self', he uses it in a totally different meaning. When I look at a tree, there is a form and there is consciousness of that form. And there is no self in it. This is exactly similar to neti-neti approach in Advaita. It is the same negation of anatta lakhana sutta which is also used in neti-neti. But Buddha's message has been widely misinterpreted all over the world.. Instead of the words like 'Brahman', 'Atman', Buddha used the words 'unborn', 'dhammakaya' etc... When we are discussing all this in English, you need to keep in mind that they are loose translations of Pali and Sanskrit words. There is a reason for this difference in the usage of words in Buddhism and Vedanta. History has the answer. Buddha existed at the same time when the first Upanishad was composed. We are talking about the age where there was no internet or technology or any kind of convenience. So, Buddha naturally used a different set of words than what was used in the first Upanishad which was 'Brihadaranyaka Upanishad'... The Upanishads also said the same thing in a different way.

The title of this thread has the answer to your question: New Age vs. Neo-Advaita vs. Authentic Spirituality... So the premise here is that only one of the three is authentic and you said that yourself. Labels like 'new age', 'neo Advaita' really do not mean much because there are no well-defined points on how this categorization is made...But as much as I have seen, many teachers who belong to this new age/neo Advaita group are deluded. When we talk about universally accepted spiritual paths, we are dealing with a mixture of things. Even the statement that God created the world in 7 days is universally accepted across Christians, but that doesn't make it true. But at the same time, there are certainly well-established methods which are universally accepted among authentic teachers. I see a general theme in all such well-established paths such as Advaita Vedanta, Yoga and Buddhism. There are three things which are important in these paths: 1) Discrimination between the pure awareness and the contents of the awareness. (This may sound like dualistic teaching, but it is pretty much essential. Developing this discrimination is the key to a spiritual path. All spiritual practices which involve doing something are intended to develop this discrimination. 2) Doing This involves anything that you do, like Kriya Yoga techniques, Shamatha meditation in Buddhism, Ashtanga Yoga or anything which involves doing something. This is mainly intended to purify the mind, prepare the ground and develop discrimination and non-attachment. 3) Non - Doing This is the very important step. The problem with neo-Advaita is that they talk about this and only this! They completely ignore the practices intended to prepare the ground. You will hear them saying things like 'You cannot do anything to become enlightened', 'You are already enlightened' etc. But these things are not said in traditional paths until a seeker is progressed to a certain level. Non-doing simply put is simply abiding as the pure awareness or witness. There are various approaches to this and this is also explained in various ways and various names like neti-neti, self-inquiry, mindfulness, witnessing etc. The underlying concept is the same. You abide as the witness, allow the thoughts and sensations to arise and pass away; since you might already have a strong discrimination at this point, there will be simple recognition of 'neti neti' without you having to do anything. This non-doing leads to a complete merger of the observer and the observed; the witness and the witnessed. In fact, there is no reason to even teach that the observer and the observed is the same, because it is automatically recognized by direct experience of truth. Read this for more info: https://nellaishanmugam.wordpress.com/2018/03/01/spiritual-enlightenment-the-groundwork-needed-for-seekers/

As the extrovert person moves on, he becomes one with the whole universe. As he advances, he reaches to a point beyond which nothing is left outside, he becomes identified with the outer world. The day this happens, nothing remains within or without. But by becoming one with the world outside, he finds himself and he finds the truth. Then he declares: ‘I am Brahman’. He becomes one with the entire universe. When he says: ‘I am the Whole’, he is indeed one with the Whole. Then he feels the moon and the stars are moving inside him. The introvert person while going deep within comes to a point where nothing is left to be seen, he becomes a void. Then he is able to say: ‘I am not’. Such as the flame of a lamp blows out and disappears -- everything disappears. The extrovert is ultimately able to grasp the whole. The introvert is ultimately able to grasp the shunya, the void. And both, the void and the purna, the whole, mean the same thing. But the extrovert reaches by moving along the outer journey; the introvert reaches by moving along the inner journey. At the end, the extrovert completely eliminates the inner world, nothing is left inside, only the outer world remains. The introvert goes on becoming oblivious of the outer world to such a point that nothing remains outside. And the interesting thing is that both the inner and the outer prevail together. Of the two only one cannot remain. Hence, when one disappears the other disappears too. If only the outer were to exist and nothing remains inwardly, the outer too will be no more. Because how would you otherwise identify the outer? In order for the outer to exist, the inner is necessary. It is only because there is the inner does the outer exist. If only the inner were to be left and nothing were to remain in the outer at all, how would you be able to call it the inner? It exists only in comparison to something of the outer, it is inner relative to the outer. For example, the pocket of your jacket -- its one part makes the inner side in which you put your hand, and the other is the visible part seen outside. Can you ever imagine a situation where only the inside of the pocket would remain without its outer part? Or, take your home, for example, Can you ever think that only the inner section of the house should remain and not what is outside of it? If only the interior part were to exist but not the outer part, the inner too will cease to be. If only what is outside were to remain and nothing inside, that which is outside the house would also cease to exist. The inner and the outer are two sides of the same coin. Hence, there are two ways to go about. Either drop the outer or drop the inner. With the falling of one, the other will also fall on its own accord. And then, that which would remain, which was present in the outer as well as in the inner -- in fact, it was always present even beyond the inner and the outer too. If our journey has been outward, then, that which would remain to exist we will call it the Brahman; if we have followed the inward journey, we will call it shunya, void, nirvana. Those who have seen god as Whole, they have traveled through the outer journey. Those who have seen god as a Void, they have followed the inner journey. It is not that while following the spiritual discipline of yoga, or the outer path, some day you will have to start with the Sankhya -- there is no need for it. Yoga itself will help you to reach. Let us look at it yet another way so that it becomes easier to understand. Let us assume a man is standing at the number ten and if he were to proceed from ten to number eleven and then twelve and so on, he would eventually reach to the infinite. A point will come where all numbers would vanish. If he were to come down from number ten to nine, eight, and thus move back, after reaching number one he would arrive at zero where all numbers are bound to disappear too. No matter from which end you begin your journey, the numbers will disappear. When this happens then it does not matter from where you started your search. That which will remain beyond the numbers will be the same. This can be understood in terms of Positive and Negative as well. Some people like positive words; these are the same people who are extrovert. Some people like negative words; these are the people who are introvert -- such as, the Buddha. Buddha is very fond of negative terms. Even if God were to appear before him, He would appear in terms of “nothingness”, in terms of void. Hence the word Buddha chose for his moksha, for his liberation is -- nirvana. And nirvana means: blowing of the lamp. Such as a lamp blows out, similarly, the individual blows out. What remains after that, is nirvana. Someone asks Buddha, “ What will happen to you after nirvana?” And Buddha says: “What happens when the lamp blows out? It becomes one with the Void”. So Buddha’s emphasis is on the negative. It is an introvert’s emphasis. Whenever an introvert will speak he will use negative terms. He will say: “neti, neti”, neither this, nor that. One wants to reach a point where nothing is left. But when nothing is left, everything is found. Then there is language of the positive: this, and this, and this too. When everything comes together, then what exists that too is all that IS. These are the only two ways. You can choose whichever kind of a journey you like. These two kinds appear very contradictory. They are contradictory as far as types are concerned, but as far as achievement is concerned there is no contradiction. One arrives through shunya, the void, as much as one arrives through the Whole. Some arrives by saying: neither this, nor that. Others arrive by seeing god in all -- they think and feel by realizing god in everything. The basic idea is one wants to reach at a point where duality exists no more. Duality can dissolve into nothingness in two ways; it can become non-existent if either one accepts everything, or one denies everything. It can happen if either all bondages are dropped, or all bondages are identified with the atman, the spirit. Either there is no bondage any more; or, the bondage itself becomes everything, the atman -- it becomes the universal, then too it ceases to be bondage. Neither the yogi needs to go into Sankhya, nor does the seeker of Sankhya need to go into Yoga. And yet, the point where both reach is the same. One does not have to make any changes. Both bring you to the same place. Each individual has to look within to see what one’s interests are, what is his or her true identity, whether one’s leaning is toward the positive or the negative; toward the Whole or the Nothingness. It can also be seen this way: if a person is of emotional type, if he is filled with emotions, the language of Wholeness will be acceptable to him. And if the person is of a very intellectual type, the language and expression of denial, of the Negetive will be acceptable to him. Logic negates, it follows the process of elimination. It goes on saying: this is meaningless, that is meaningless, that too is meaningless -- it keeps discarding until nothing is left to throw away. When nothing is left to throw out, the logic too drops on its own accord. BHAGAVADGEETA III - Karmayoga Translated by Swami Satya Vedant Discourses given by Osho at Cross Maidan, Bombay 28th December, 1970 - 7th January 1971

@Fountainbleu Like reading The Power of Now and feeling better, keep going in that direction. In terms of meditation, neti neti, and self inquiry, do what you can do, as you can do it, for the immediate relaxation, freedom, and awareness of it. It would be advisable to anyone seeking enlightenment, to be present now, and not in thought about obtaining a future state. I wish you well in your continued healing and recovery. Simply listening to contemporary YouTube teachers is also helpful. If you are feeling low, Abe Hicks, Elkhart Tolle or Mooji might be ideal. If you are feeling well and looking for the insights, try Rupert Spira, etc. If you are feeling on top of the world and can handle an existential kick in the groin, check out Leo Gura. (Jk) As you know, miraculous healings are very real, sometimes they take time, sometimes they are spontaneous. Perhaps you are an example of one already ❤️ It might be useful to feel out the forum, and private message someone that you feel resonance with, and conversation with them. It may look like addressing each concern slowly, realizing one step at a time, and it might take a while. This place is loaded with people aiming to help people. My opinion, if The Power of Now moved you, you can become enlightened. You can realize that you are whole already. I believe you can.

Dude......I only read Peter Ralston The Book of Not Knowing during my journey out of those two. I dont agree with it on the some parts like the emotions section, but 98% of the book is solid. I found the book quite helpful. I might give Neti Neti book a read in future. As far as my practice is concerned ill copy paste to you what I wrote to someone: Everything you sense through your senses is always changing. Something that is changing cannot be it(truth), so the content of your senses cannot be trusted. This includes the mind as well. There is also nobody aware of the content of the senses. Ego is aware of the content of the senses but it is not it(truth). You can say awarenesses is aware of itself. Who is the you who is aware of the senses?. Question always comes back to this, Who is this me? Question everything you know about yourself. Your life story, your beliefs, your relationship with people, your relationship to the universe, your daily routine, everything. Enlightenment is more like Untruth Unrealisation rather than Truth realisation. Only Truth exists. Everything else is false and should crumble away, so only Truth is left. Cheers

@Saumaya Hey I got a question for ya, first of all have you read Neti-Neti Meditation by Andre Doshim Halaw? would you describe your practice as described in that book? And have you read the book of not knowing by peter ralston, did you find it helpfull on your own journey? Thanks for being an inspiration for me brother!

Hi this is the second time I am asking this question. I think I figured out how to ask it better this time. I am sorry if the question seems seemingly simple but I take a long time to set up the asking. Last time I asked this question I got a lot of people ignoring the question to tell me not to ask it. I want to see what it is like to fear death. I don't think I have had that fear truly before in my life, and if I have, it slipped out of my memory, unnoticed. I want to see that fear of death, understand it, or at the least, be able to compare life and death in a meaningful way. currently death has no meaning to me, and I do not fear it... I'm not really sure what to say. The methods for consciousness work I currently use limit how I can pursue that. I only practice Acitve Mindfulness, where I practice my awareness, or other mental skills, while being active throughout the day. When I spend time contemplating, it is during walks. Otherwise I am simply practicing returning to awareness as often as I can, and increasing my ability for it. This primarily comes from the statement, "awareness alone is curative" - compared with my need to be motivated and capable of taking action. So, I will be walking when I contemplate the fear of death. That is the limit to what work I will be doing towards understanding or experiencing the fear of death. I tried comming up with ideas, tried contemplating it a few times, but I feel lost, and am looking for suggestions. I need a different angle, one that I have overlooked - and I've honestly got no angles at all. My best idea was to investigate the fleeting nature of life, but that has got me no where meaningful. Two questions, either or both, I am seeking an answer to: How can I contemplate the fear of death while walking, to either understand it, or experience it directly? What is it like to fear death? please do not get distracted by the following: I am not going to run into the street or anything along that line. I am not going to do any drugs. Those of you who think I shouldn't fear death, just leave. You only show your arrogance and uselessness as a peer to peer mentor if you fail to accept my simple and direct question. don't try to talk about ego. 90% of the forums right now are obsessed with ego, and as such, the discussion is spam. I have ego. You have ego. It is what it is. Ignore it, if you cannot, then don't post here please. similarly, 75% of the boards go on and on about enlightenment, consiousness, and nonduality on a level where they literally contradict themselves or other posts just to explore cleverness. I am not seeking that here. The neti neti method is not one I want to apply to my seeking the fear of death. Please trust that I know what I am seeking and asking for, and answer one or both of my questions directly. Do not try to analyze who I am or try to argue against what I seek. again, sorry for the long post. TL:DR/summary - answer this question: "how can I fear death?" or this one: "what is it like to fear death?" - and don't go see it as anything other than a simple question. no drugs no ego no "you shouldn't fear death". I have a pursuit I want to test out to see where it leads me. I found myself stuck, not sure of how to pursue it. I am simply looking for some way to move forward in my pursuit.

@Pernani I think deducing the most beneficial practice by individual could be done relatively based on their past / what needs to be honed and what needs to be surrendered. That way you have an idea of the intended outcome or what is to be gained, before beginning a practice, after spending a lot of time any arbitrarily. That way you could have a clear reason to stick with it, and be confident you’re doing the right practice at the right time. Here’s a link with a few basics, might be helpful. I notice sometimes, individually speaking, people do breath focus, self inquiry, do nothing & occasionally neti neti as almost a default, and occasionally a lessor heard of meditation would have been more efficient and beneficial (at the time). (IMO) Check out this link for many underappreciated meditations: https://sites.google.com/site/psychospiritualtools/Home/meditation-practices On a funny note, as I was typing neti neti (meaning not this, not this), autocorrect keeps changing it to something else. Like it’s mocking me. Lol

I would like to share my story, which consists of three awakening experiences so far. I do not intend to keep a journal and I would like to invite discussion and ask for directions. Due to nature of my self-inquiry I am not committed to any spiritual tradition and know basics of very few ones, but I'm open to suggestions to what pursue next. This thread will contain three posts, as I would like to go in depth on each one and they may not be digestible in a one go. Currently, I'm intuitively feeling that a fourth awakening is coming and I think that remembering details of my previous ones will help it come along. For now, let's talk about my first awakening that happened 3 years ago, and some background. I was always smart. First, as a kid that did as little as possible to not get in trouble with parents and play videogames for the rest of the time. Then, as a teenager that would get hooked up on science and computing, pursuing career in mechanical engineering. I was raised in a reasonably wealthy family and by the time I was finishing my master's degree I had everything most people have by the time they are in their mid-40. A house, a car, a cat, and a reasonably well-paid job thanks to my family. And, of course - feeling absolutely crushed by life's miseries, barely holding it all together. I was having something of a year-off in which I was supposed to write my thesis, but instead of doing that I decided to check out philosophy. I was always admiring authorities in science, and philosophy was like its big daddy so of course I would get interested in that. Being a youtube junkie that I still am, I found The School of life channel and ran a crash course in art and philosophy. What got me really fascinated was existential philosophy, especially Martin Heidegger. He was advertised as the most obscure philosopher that talks about the most mundane things, and boy, how did I love riddles. My first awakening had two stages. First stage was while reading about existentialism as a whole on Stanford's encyclopedia of philosophy, and the second one was while reading Martin Heidegger's "Being and Time". Facts that I injected were not important in my awakening by themselves, but the process of opening myself to possibility. Transcending the point of view I had at the time. What is important is that I did not really try to grasp the logic this philosophy provides, but to accept it as it was given to me, and try to view "the real world" through its lens. A logical/rational person like me could do that only because I trusted that those philosophers were wiser than me and I was trying to connect with feelings I knew I had inside. I was trying to prove to myself that I am a human being, and not a robot which I saw as a root cause of unhappiness in my life. In the first stage, while reading broadly about existentialism, it induced severe feelings of loneliness, sadness and compassion towards other human beings. I remember looking at people focused on their business and feeling sorry for them for being "lost" in their "roles". I suddenly started cherishing simple things, like sunshine, or the wind. Breathing. At the same time, I started to doubt my material paradigm as I believed that I cannot simply be summed up as a story. I started seriously thinking about death, and having walks to the cemetery every few days to contemplate it. When I saw that something was going on with this existentialism thing, I finally decided to wrestle with Heidegger and thought to myself: "Damn, I read tensor calculus for fun, how hard can this whole "Being and Time" be?". Well, the book gave me a good fight and then knocked my Ego out for two weeks. The mainstream advice for anyone interested in the book is that you don't try to read it unless you have a Ph.D. in Philosophy. I was too determined to care at that point, so I read it in two languages to account for mistranslations, while watching Hubert Dreyfus' lectures on youtube. It took me several months to get through one third of the book, when my first awakening happened. It was a gradual process in which I saw how I construct reality. The book highlights the method of self-inquiry called Phenomenology that is used to map the inner territory of a being called Dasein. The being is defined as one that asks the question "What is being?", which is what the book tries to answer. I have been doing that out of pure curiosity for months, each day, every free minute until it hit me: "None of this is real, everything is me". It was a very nauseating feeling, very strange and profoundly beautiful. In everything I saw, I saw how I was in it. Everything was a reflection of myself - a book wouldn't be a book without me. I saw how "I" was constructed out of a "book", and the "book" was constructed out of "I". How "I" was dispersed in everything I saw, felt, smelled and touched. It was absolutely fascinating. Until, of course I understood that I can take ownership of the construction and I started to deconstruct what "I" didn't like. Funnily enough it was things I was the most proud of, like how I was attached to my house, but felt miserable for not earning it. How I loved my car, but felt fear of losing it. To disassociate from my body that I thought was too fat and didn't like. It felt so freeing that I cried. I got so carried away with this deconstruction that at one point I realized that once I knew how to do it, there was no coming back. I could not forget how to and I was in total control of everything. I could go all the way down into nothingness. And then it hit me: "A human is literally nothing and it is terrifying". "We run away from it and shove things into this bottomless pit without realizing it cannot be filled." "This is the misery of the human condition.". After days of fear, nausea, crying, laughter, ecstasy and love - the remnants of "I" decided that we cannot live this way. That this is too unsustainable and we have to close the pit. So it happened. In the midst of things, I reached out to my parents for help. First, they tried to fix me physically, when that showed not to be the problem - they sent me to therapy. Very pragmatic people, but hey - good call. I stayed with the therapist till this day and I'm very glad. What happened next is that I lost 16 kg over the next few years, changed my job to a better one, met my soon-to-be wife and graduated school at the top of my class. Ego at its best, trying to keep the pit closed. Overall: great ride - 10/10, would ride again So, what technically happened? What I learned a few years later is that I probably did a very intense Neti-Neti inquiry while being totally clueless. Ended up, probably, in the dark night of the soul and let the Ego take the wheel again to leave it. It grew back strong, but I knew that I could open the pit someday, which I did in the second awakening. I will report on it soon.

Martin Heidegger's "Being and Time". While reading it and trying to make sense of it, I was unknowingly doing the Neti-Neti method for months. When it hits me, I was out for two weeks.

I was a mutant before, now I realised I'm not that! Neti neti hellsyeah

@Charlotte It's neti, neti, until not even that ... Not good with words? Not to worry. Talk to the wind ... It does not care .

@StephenK Mouse and I don't really disagree on much. It's mostly just a difference in emphasis and style. He wants you to take a very narrow approach, pure neti neti -- because that's the approach that apparently worked well for him. There is value in that if your only concern is the direct pursuit of the Absolute and nothing else matters to you and you are 100% motivated to get to the Absolute. For a few people that will work. But for most people it will not simply because they have a lot of psychological obstacles to deal with first and they won't resonate with neti neti. Each path has its pros and cons. And then there are issues outside of the domain of strict nonduality, like epistemology or philosophy of science or mastering your emotions or how to be a good human being or what you should do with your life... none of which will be adequately addressed by neti neti or any other one method or teaching. The fuel of all these spiritual debates is that one person tries to push his spiritual path onto everyone else because he feels his path is the best, assuming it will work for everyone else. This assumption is totally false. But that doesn't stop the person from trying because he's a firm believer in his one path. Because most people haven't seriously walked multiple paths and they have been radicalize by one teacher or another and turned into zealots. There's nothing new about this. It's been happening since the dawn of time. Everyone believes their path is the best and should be adopted by everyone else. You have to appreciate that reaching enlightenment is a totally separate matter from effectively teaching and spreading enlightenment. The greatest spiritual achievers are not necessarily the greatest spreaders and teachers. The teacher has to meet the student where the student is at. And many enlightened people don't know how to do that. In the same way that the best physicists are rarely the best physics teachers. To whittle all of life down to neti neti is extremely short-sighted in my opinion. And as a teacher, it doesn't make sense to me. As a teacher, I have to be open to a variety of tools and methods. There are SO many amazing tools for raising consciousness and personal development that I would never want to abandon them all for neti neti. Some spiritual paths are very narrow, emphasizing only the Absolute. Other spiritual paths are very broad, emphasizing diet, right conduct, compassion, psychological development, paranormal abilities, right relationships, etc. Neither one is best. There are tradeoffs to each and you have to choose for yourself which is right for you at which time in your life. Personally, I employ both types of teachings, narrow and broad. I find both incredibly worthwhile.

I'm a bit confused by your response, it's a bit cryptic. I was just saying I'm not sure the real effectiveness of neti neti, or self-inquiry and I feel a Vipassana style works better, but ultimately I could absolutely be wrong. Which is why I made sure to add that he, or she, should do what feels right for them. My only point is that when you concentrate on 'what is' you in effect are doing self-inquiry and neti neti. If you can focus on a sensation in the present moment, the moments with no mind you are experiencing reality without the mind taking ownership. I feel that neti neti in particular could be a bit neurotic because it seems like instead of trying to quiet the mind you're having the thought, "this sensation is NOT me" rather than just seeing the sensation as it is. I believe the goal should be see sensations as they are rather than "this sensation is me," or "this sensation is NOT me." It should look more like "this sensation is this sensation." In my humble opinion. Like I said, I could be wrong. Smarter more experienced people than me would disagree so I'm open to being completely wrong about this.

My opinion is not going to agree with a lot of people on this forum, but I think that self-inquiry and neti neti aren't necessarily the best ways of meditating. If you focus on a sensation and attempt to quiet the mind, you are seeing reality as it is and as a result you are doing same thing as neti neti and self-inquiry in a way. The thing I've always noticed with self-inquiry is that I'd inquire about the self and then my mind would try to find an answer. Any answer it finds is false because that is just the nature of the mind, so I'd often simply go to the present moment with a sensation. I don't know, just take this for what it is and do what you feel is right.

You've asked a lot of questions, many which one wouldn't need to ask or worry about if they were serious. They are just more ego distractions to save itself and keep the mind active on the wrong places. Good questions don't look like them. A lot of it can be summed as just going alone, starting again as you've never read anything and finding out for yourself. Use the foundation of an approach (who am I, neti neti, is this true) and discover for yourself. Maybe if you uncover what it might (not) be, go back and check what they are saying matches the same recognition. You'll then maybe see how they themselves are unknowingly supporting the illusion by talking and describing it as much as they do to their followers. Regarding the bold, yes, they are all distraction. Fun ones. But distractions. They are what some call, spiritual materialism. It was a playground I was familiar so i'm not saying they are not real per se, but one important discovery made me abandon them all. They all pre-suppose and promote 'separation' and the big one pre-suppose and promote a personal and others identity. I had to throw them out, and yes, you kinda do have to be ruthless with this as ego is attached to a lot and maya is a trickster. It will very hard if one has as spent years in a place that supports a false self.

Neti neti not this ?

Welp seems like you're open minded enough to consider the possibility that you dont exist so watch Neti Neti method by leo. You dont have to believe shit he says but he'll guide you through a empirical investigation

Hey Guys, so I´ve been doing Self Inquiry for over a week now daily for at least 30 minutes. (to be honest I´ve lost track for how long exactly but anyways...) I´ve gotten some insights, which you can partially read in my previous posts, but for the last 2 days I felt like hitting my head against a solid 3 kilometers thick brick wall of ancieties, preconceptions, fears, beliefs and so on. And by brick I mean like mo**f***ng BRICK. Like the real kind. The kind that you need like wagons full of dynmite to get through. You get my point it seems insurmountable. Basically my mind is unwilling to open to there even being a possibility of the state of no self which we refer to as enlightenment, awakening and all sorts of other labels. So today I thought I´d switch it up a knotch and why not do the Guided Visualization by Leo in his Neti Neti Method Video. So I did and now the "problem is even clearer. In his video he´s saying something like: Until you´ve opened your mind up to the possibility of not being a Self your not ready to do the Inquiry. The inquiry starts after you´ve opened your mind. And this is what happened... "No I can´t", rebells my mind in utter panic. "Why not I ask", a little bit annoyed. "Because this is all we have. We only have ourselves. Without this you´ll be unsafed, you´ll be alone, you´ll be damned !" I get more and more frustrated and pissed at my self. How could I be so stupid ? After reading all the books and watching all the videos about Enlightenment, how the Ego keeps you enslaved and so forth this protector part had such an utter faith in the fact that the old me, the mind, the EGO would be the only way to feel secure. I´m hitting my head against this wall. Again and again. And like a snake the mind wispers: "No don´t try. It´s pointless. It´s obvious. We know how we are." I take note of the comment. Try to not give it to much energy and focus again on my inquiry. And there´s the wall again. This doesn´t make any sense. My mind distracts me with totally random thoughts of this or that. My relashionship, eating food, porn and what not. It´s so annoying. In fact it´s painfull. Not to mention my other inner emotional conflicts which constantly interfer. My heart and throat chakra tensed in anxiety. It all feels hopeless and pointless. I´m stuck forever stuck in this rotten misery. So known. So ugly. But yet it somehow feels safe. I can´t get out. I have to get out. I´m in resistance. I´m stuck. Gosh this is annoying. But sometimes. This slight hint of an awareness that there´s something there to discover which I´m simply unaware of for now. The insight of how lacking the connection to this conciousness, this awareness, is the root of all my "problems" in life. But I can find it. Somehow. Some way. There´s hope. Not only that. There´s perspective. Perspective for all the love and passion to pour right to the wounds inflicted in the past and light to crack into the concrete block of equmiliated falsehood and deception of the mind. It keeps me driving to the truth all day everyday. With every step and every breath. So my question is how do i make this part of me feel safe enough to start doing the Inquiry and no longer resisting it ? And how do I deal with my mind and Ego resisting this work ? Much Love, Moritz

@Serotoninluv “you” = self = ego = symbol within the scope of the dual = the sum of experiences and memories and beliefs and actions that behaves as a separate entity from that which it perceives. Nondual or or not we do in fact perceive existences through a veil of duality. It is a part of the experience. That is not separate from that which is inseparable. Yet we manage to do it anyway hah - but that there is the real purpose of “ego death” - to find some level of oneness, elevate consciousness to be less limited by the illusions of duality. the contradictions are really hard to avoid ... @tool/use it. I am unsure if I follow that. I cannot use a mouth to eat itself. I am missing the point... why woul the ego be a tool used to transcend ego? I suppose there is neti neti, or even to look at the yin and notice how it outlines the yang. Is this what is meant by ego as a tool? Or perhaps you are stating how meditation can feel novel and yet remain ego.... the same illusion as before but on a new level of it.. in a way that that is all we can do to try to embrace the absolute.... hm.... thought provoking actually.