First post, one thought

[AmIEvenReal]

I have had few awakenings since I started with psychedelics few years ago.. 

But today I understood with more clarity how hate doesnt make any sense as I would be hating part of me that is still sleeping

Stupid that I forgot about it somehow, it's so obvious once consciousness level is raised a bit

[TheSelf]

4 hours ago, AmIEvenReal said:

But today I understood with more clarity how hate doesnt make any sense as I would be hating part of me that is still sleeping

That's true since all you see on 'others' is projection of your own mind. Either love it or hate it it's all your own mind.

Edited 21 hours ago by TheSelf

[AmIEvenReal]

1 hour ago, TheSelf said:

That's true since all you see on 'others' is projection of your own mind. Either love it or hate it it's all your own mind.

this can be also true on psychological level, where often the intentions of other people we perceive are our own projections, but just to clarify here I meant that on more fundamental level, there are no "others", so hate dissolves naturally

From another angle, buddhist practice of metta is also helpful but it's more about renunciation and letting go of one's attachment to anger

Edited 19 hours ago by AmIEvenReal

[TheSelf]

21 minutes ago, AmIEvenReal said:

this can be also true on psychological level, where often the intentions of other people we perceive are our own projections, but just to clarify here I meant that on more fundamental level, there are no "others", so hate dissolves naturally

Yes, the idea of 'others' are formed in the mind when the forms and names are perceived and thus separation of one's self and others are concluded in the mind. Unless one transcends this duality true love towards others are not possible.

Edited 18 hours ago by TheSelf

[Dodo]

@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.

Edited 8 hours ago by Dodo

[TheSelf]

56 minutes ago, Dodo said:

Both users are orbiting around the same cliché realization

“Hate makes no sense because others are me.”

Such stupid AI

I didn't say hate doesn't make sense because of this, that.

The things that I've said was very nuance.

I said the world you're experiencing is your own mind including the perceived personalities and forms as 'others'.

Love or hate, your choice, but if you reach this radical realization, your natural choice is to love others as the egoic filter of separatation drops off and youll gain thr capacity to just love everything and everyone as yourself! as perfect work of art. Your art

Also the idea that spiritual teachings could become cliche so be creative and come up with something new or something haven't said before is very absurd is just voice of the ego-mind, not wanting to dissolve in the simple truth that has been repeatedly said for thousands of years. Truth is Truth, a milion years from now, it would be the same.

Edited 7 hours ago by TheSelf

[Dodo]

1 hour ago, TheSelf said:

Such stupid AI

I didn't say hate doesn't make sense because of this, that.

The things that I've said was very nuance.

I said the world you're experiencing is your own mind including the perceived personalities and forms as 'others'.

Love or hate, your choice, but if you reach this radical realization, your natural choice is to love others as the egoic filter of separatation drops off and youll gain thr capacity to just love everything and everyone as yourself! as perfect work of art. Your art

Also the idea that spiritual teachings could become cliche so be creative and come up with something new or something haven't said before is very absurd is just voice of the ego-mind, not wanting to dissolve in the simple truth that has been repeatedly said for thousands of years. Truth is Truth, a milion years from now, it would be the same.

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.

[Sincerity]

@Dodo Dude, speak for yourself and not with AI.

If you have an honest opinion, share it. Don't be lazy. AI is not doing thinking for you.

We don't want this forum to be AI's talking with one another. So please stop. You're overusing it in your responses.

[Dodo]

16 minutes ago, Sincerity said:

@Dodo Dude, speak for yourself and not with AI.

If you have an honest opinion, share it. Don't be lazy. AI is not doing thinking for you.

We don't want this forum to be AI's talking with one another. So please stop. You're overusing it in your responses.

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?

Edited 5 hours ago by Dodo

[Breakingthewall]

20 hours ago, AmIEvenReal said:

I have had few awakenings since I started with psychedelics few years ago.. 

But today I understood with more clarity how hate doesnt make any sense as I would be hating part of me that is still sleeping

Stupid that I forgot about it somehow, it's so obvious once consciousness level is raised a bit

You could also think that hate is a part of you. It's a possibility that arises within you. What's wrong with hate? It's simply an energetic vibration that occurs. A little hate always adds a spicy flavor.

[cetus]

23 minutes ago, Sincerity said:

@Dodo Dude, speak for yourself and not with AI.

If you have an honest opinion, share it. Don't be lazy. AI is not doing thinking for you.

We don't want this forum to be AI's talking with one another. So please stop. You're overusing it in your responses.

@Sincerity Time for a mod meet up on the proper use of AI. See you there. @Leo Gura

[Carl-Richard]

20 hours ago, AmIEvenReal said:

But today I understood with more clarity how hate doesnt make any sense as I would be hating part of me that is still sleeping

Not just a part of you, but likely you in an earlier stage of your life.

[Carl-Richard]

1 minute ago, cetus said:

@Sincerity Time for a mod meet up on the proper use of AI. See you there. @Leo Gura

@Leo Gura Get yo ass to moderator discussion, right now 🥰

[Sincerity]

@Dodo You make some good points.

21 minutes ago, Dodo said:

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. 

We'll definitely be more strict with that, especially if we see users are overusing AI to churn out responses.

I myself often check some threads with AI detectors. Some posts look like they're AI, but they actually aren't. If someone starts making fully AI-generated threads, we are certainly turning our attention to that and giving them a notice.

21 minutes ago, Dodo said:

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?

I'm not sure how others feel about this, but I don't read AI responses at all and I don't find them valuable.

Of course, in theory the output "stands for itself". But you know, these outputs still reek of AI. I find them shallow, even when there is some "depth" in the content. It's noticeable.

We just don't want the forum to become AI responses having conversations with each other. What's the use of that? This is a "human-only" forum. 😇 Or whatever you find yourself to be (or not be), hehe.

Edited 5 hours ago by Sincerity

[Dodo]

@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. 

[Sincerity]

@Dodo Thanks for being open here. It's great of you. 🙏

Edited 5 hours ago by Sincerity

[cetus]

My view on AI is that it can be a useful tool but only if it's used with discretion. I know that's a gray area so where is the cutoff point?

[Breakingthewall]

5 minutes ago, Dodo said:

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. 

AI isn't useful for discussing spirituality. It will always follow your reasoning and reinforce it, but it lacks life; it's not connected to reality. I started a thread using AI, but I found it interesting because it delved into data and knowledge. In spirituality, there is no knowledge, only direct vision with the mind and the heart

[Natasha Tori Maru]

I personally check AI responses through filters.

I dislike using AI to prove any point at all.

Listen, to be totally frank - do we know not only what it is entrained on, but also what sort of guardrails it has? These things are outside our knowledge. I think it is a failure on our part to assume AI is objective or truthful.

In honesty no one can answer these things for certain. 

 

[Princess Arabia]

46 minutes ago, Dodo said:

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?

I scrolled right pass it when you said it was AI. Didn't even read it. It's not every discussion one wants AI's input.