The definite guide to non-duality, enlightenment, and the nature of reality

[Emanyalpsid]

This topic is for all the people (beginners, intermediates, experts) who want to understand and experience non-duality, enlightenment and the nature of reality to its full extent and in this lifetime. 

First I want to thank and complement you Leo on everything you already have achieved and I hope you will allow me to share my knowledge for the benefit of mankind. I do not do this for a personal gain, I do not want to gain a community, also the website I refer to has no commercial intentions (no ads, no trackers, no cookies, no referrals, etc.). It is only about sharing knowledge.

There seems to be a lot of people having trouble understanding and experiencing the aforementioned concepts because they are given a different meaning by different people. 

Enlightenment (as dubbed by Buddhists some 2500years ago) does not mean more than a sharp decline or dissolving. As in the enlightening of pain, meaning the pain goes away. Pain is just used as an example here. Enlightenment is a feeling and not a state of being, one feels enlightened.

Non-duality means just not dual or one. With thinking, you are creating a duality between the thought and what you think about. So non-duality only exists without thought, because if something is mentioned by a thought or word, it is defined. In doing so, breaking one (reality) into two (subjective and objective reality), therefore creating a duality.

The most important thing for understanding these concepts is understanding the nature of reality. Reality is of dependent origin; space is dependent upon time, matter on gravity, life on its environment, senses on the body and consciousness on reality. All of this is explained in a clear and understandable manner on http://www.foundationsofhumanlife.com.

The website is a guide for the Western logical thinking mind to understand and experience the route from the self to the non-self, to understanding the dependent nature of reality.

I hope it may serve you well.

Warm regards,

The universe

 

Sharing is caring

 

Edited September 16, 2018 by Emanyalpsid

[Leo Gura]

@Emanyalpsid The explanations on that website are very materialistic and dualistic.

I don't see a proper explanation there of what the universe or reality is.

There is no physical universe. That is just a concept. The universe did not originate from nothing, it is nothing.

There is also no such thing as perception. There is also no such thing as consciousness inside a body.

Consciousness is not dependent on reality. Reality and consciousness are identical.

Seems like you may have realized no-self, but not the Absolute nature of reality.

There are many depths of enlightenment and nonduality, so be careful.

[Nahm]

@Emanyalpsid

Being is not dependent. Consciousness does not “depend” on appearance of consciousness. What you have mentioned is appearance of.

”Consciousness needs a reality in order to exist.”

These are not separate, though the appearance is admittedly convincing. 

[Emanyalpsid]

On 15-9-2018 at 1:28 PM, Leo Gura said:

@Emanyalpsid The explanations on that website are very materialistic and dualistic.

Well the site explains how to go from duality to non-duality based upon observations.

Quote

I don't see a proper explanation there of what the universe or reality is.

Page 7 until page 11 are all about explaining reality and the universe.

Quote

There is no physical universe. That is just a concept. The universe did not originate from nothing, it is nothing.

No physical universe? The universe is nothing? It seems to me that you totally lost connection with reality.

Try holding one hand horizontally and holding a lighter in your other hand a few centimers below the hand you are holding horizontally. Now lit the lighter and see how long you can maintain your view that the universe is nothing and that it is just a concept.

You will become conscious of a burning feeling, because you experience this, it is real. You get this burning feeling because the temperature from the fire out of the lighter hits the nerve cells in your hand. The nerve cells in your hand send a signal, via neurotransmitters, to your brain where you become conscious of a feeling. The lighter however is not created by your consciousness, you become conscious of the lighter when you see and feel it. The lighter however is constructed in a factory. The concept of the lighter, as in the word 'lighter', is a construct of consciousness, constructed by your intellect sense, thought thought, in the mind.  

Quote

There is also no such thing as perception. There is also no such thing as consciousness inside a body.

As consciousness is awareness, what would you be aware or conscious of, if you had no eyes, ears, nose, mouth, nerves or brain?

Quote

Consciousness is not dependent on reality. Reality and consciousness are identical.

They are mutually dependent, this means they are identical or you can not separate them. Consciousness exists in reality; the body, from which consciousness arises, exists in reality. Therefore; consciousness depends on reality. However that what you perceive/ are conscious of/ are aware of, is reality; so reality is also dependent upon consciousness. If you had read the whole text you would have read this. However, it is not that easy to comprehend.

Quote

Seems like you may have realized no-self, but not the Absolute nature of reality.

Again, it seems you have not read the whole text. If you had, you would have read that page 1 until 6 are about seeing through the mental construct of the self, page 7 until 11 are about the nature of reality, page 12 is about what it all means, and page 13 is about how to deal with the insights and knowledge in every day life.

Quote

There are many depths of enlightenment and nonduality, so be careful.

There is only non-duality or duality. As enlightenment is just a feeling, this feeling can be weak or strong.

Based upon your reaction I presume you did not read the whole text, but just some pages or part of a page. As stated on the front page of the website, it reads as a book and the pages have a logical order. If you jump in half way, it is almost the same as if you were dropped somewhere in a very big forest and have to find the path. So may I advice you to read the whole thing? It only takes you up to 2 hours probably.

Edited September 16, 2018 by Emanyalpsid

[Emanyalpsid]

On 15-9-2018 at 1:34 PM, Nahm said:

@Emanyalpsid

Being is not dependent. Consciousness does not “depend” on appearance of consciousness. What you have mentioned is appearance of.

What do you mean with being?

Consciousness depends on reality, as input (matter, waves, etc.) from reality in contact with the senses creates consciousness.

On 15-9-2018 at 1:34 PM, Nahm said:

”Consciousness needs a reality in order to exist.”

These are not separate, thought the appearance is admittedly convincing. 

This sentence does not state they are separate. Consciousness is dependent upon reality, and reality is dependent upon consciousness. Without reality no consciousness, and without consciousness no reality. So they are not separate. 

I can also advice you to read the whole text from beginning to end, to not draw false conclusions based on your interpretations instead of what is written. You are also then able to understand the nature of reality.

[Nahm]

@Emanyalpsid

Being = You.

Consciousness = reality.  

Consciousness = exist.

Consciousness = Being.

Consciousness = You.

Nonexistence = the punchline. 

Consciousness knows itself, prior to “knowing any thing”, or any appearance (reality). Whatever you’re looking at, that’s consciousness.

Consciousness does not need anything, there is no thing which could be needed. Any thing is already consciousness.

Otherwise, there is desire, or the potential for desire.

Consciousness is only “conscious” of consciousness. Reality is not a separate thing or event that a first thing is conscious of.  That usage of “consciousness” implies it is the product of sensory input / brain, but those are appearance of consciousness. In the same sense that consciousness is never in actuality, ignorant of this, but there is the appearance of ignorance.  Attempt to identify, or go to, these processes of sight, eyeball, interpretation, or sound, ear, interpretation. There are no processes there, just as there is no separate self there interpreting. 

In the appearance of thought, you’ve defined consciousness and reality, and then attempt to undefine them implying an interdependent relationship with “each other”, as one needing the other, thus stating they are one.  However, there is no resolve needed, because there is no separation to begin with. You don’t need anything to be you, you are already you. You have only ever been you, and you will only ever be you. 

The word consciousness is similar to the word God, in that it triggers thinking, which utilizes meaning, and inherently brings confusion - thinking - leads to thinking there is any actual separation, but the thinking is appearance.

Consciousness gets used in that way - “reality in contact with the senses creates consciousness” but that is from the perspective of the senses, nothing creates consciousness, it is. It’s all that is. There are not two things which “contact”. That model arises in thinking. In appearance there is “outside” reality, the senses, the perception of it, etc, but these are not actual things, or actual processes, they are only consciousness appearing as actual things, or, processes. 

You can check this now, by saying, I am aware that I am aware. Nothing else is needed. 

You can wiggle your finger and ask, how did I just do that. It is unexplainable, because it is all appearance of processes, and ungroundable. 

The nature of reality is not understandable. Brains, thoughts, understand. Brains, thought, are finite appearance, of Being, of You - Infinite.

You can say “I am” and the sayer is not other than the one who knows this. 

“ I “ is one, not two. There is only one absolute reality.

The mind f is, everything I  just wrote is nonsense. 

[Emanyalpsid]

5 hours ago, Nahm said:

@Emanyalpsid

Being = You.

Consciousness = reality.  

Consciousness = exist.

Consciousness = Being.

Consciousness = You.

Nonexistence = the punchline. 

 

Thanks for your reply. I understand and second your list.

Quote

Consciousness knows itself, prior to “knowing any thing”, or any appearance (reality). Whatever you’re looking at, that’s consciousness.

 

Consciousness is not an entity, meaning something that has an existence, that is capable of knowing anything. One is aware of thought, which is part of consciousness. The meaning one gives to a thought is knowledge. Consciousness is awareness, as such, which arises through contact between the senses and an impulse (change in matter or energy) from outside or inside the body. The senses and impulses are both reality. Also where the impulses come from is reality. Whatever you see is consciousness. However a rock itself is not consciousness. Just the seeing of the rock is consciousness. 

Quote

Consciousness does not need anything, there is no thing which could be needed. Any thing is already consciousness.

Well if your heart stops pumping I'm pretty sure your consciousness is gone pretty fast.

Quote

Otherwise, there is desire, or the potential for desire.

Therefore the body requires food, water, oxygen, a body temperature of 37 degrees, sleep etc.

Quote

Consciousness is only “conscious” of consciousness. Reality is not a separate thing or event that a first thing is conscious of.  

 

In science they have a lot of evidence that the earth and the universe already existed before there was any life here; that means before we were able to be conscious of the things we experience.

Quote

That usage of “consciousness” implies it is the product of sensory input / brain, but those are appearance of consciousness. In the same sense that consciousness is never in actuality, ignorant of this, but there is the appearance of ignorance.  Attempt to identify, or go to, these processes of sight, eyeball, interpretation, or sound, ear, interpretation. There are no processes there, just as there is no separate self there interpreting. 

It is hard to follow your logic here as you make a distinction between consciousness, appearance of consciousness, and appearance of ignorance (appearance is reality?) There are some logical thought steps missing for me to make sense of it. The last I understand and it is pretty easy to identify this process; light (magnetic waves) hits the lens in your eyeball, the things you see is based upon your surroundings, our eyes can distinct colours and forms and because we have two eyes we can project an 3d image. How your interpet what you see is based upon your desire for meaning, frame of reference, worldview etc. This is also all documented very well in science. Also the neurotransmitter activity in our brain, which creates our view, through the processing of light (energy) impulses are documented quite well. Neurologists are finding out more and more every day.

 

Quote

In the appearance of thought, you’ve defined consciousness and reality, and then attempt to undefine them implying an interdependent relationship with “each other”, as one needing the other, thus stating they are one.  However, there is no resolve needed, because there is no separation to begin with. You don’t need anything to be you, you are already you. You have only ever been you, and you will only ever be you. 

I will not repeat an explanation of consciousness and reality again and how they are linked. For the explanation to people who are not aware of this, I believe it is a pretty necessary step to first identify both and then show that they are interdendent. Because people will not learn anything if you just state something without explaining how this came to be.

Quote

The word consciousness is similar to the word God, in that it triggers thinking, which utilizes meaning, and inherently brings confusion - thinking - leads to thinking there is any actual separation, but the thinking is appearance.

 

Yeah but people already think, so to get them out of thinking, you will have to show where their desire for meaning, and therefore thinking, comes from.

Quote

Consciousness gets used in that way - “reality in contact with the senses creates consciousness” but that is from the perspective of the senses, nothing creates consciousness, it is.

What i said earlier; consciousness exists, therefor it is created.

Quote

It’s all that is. There are not two things which “contact”.

I will repeat; an impulse from reality hits a sense, which is also in reality, which creates consciousness, which is also in reality. Reality is all there is, you are consciousness of reality, and your consciousness is being aware of reality. So indeed it is only one; reality. For what you experience is real. 

Quote

That model arises in thinking. In appearance there is “outside” reality, the senses, the perception of it, etc, but these are not actual things, or actual processes, they are only consciousness appearing as actual things, or, processes. 

Indeed with thinking one creates a duality. But the processes are there flowing in time. If you turn of the light or close your eyes, your sight will be gone.

Quote

You can check this now, by saying, I am aware that I am aware. Nothing else is needed. 

If you say I am aware that I am aware, you are thinking you are aware. Because you need the mind to speak. Therefore you will get; I think and therefore I am. One creates a duality by thinking.

Quote

You can wiggle your finger and ask, how did I just do that. It is unexplainable, because it is all appearance of processes, and ungroundable. 

In science, medicine, they figured this out some time ago. Ask some doctors who help people recover from an accident, paralysis, strokes etc.

Quote

The nature of reality is not understandable. Brains, thoughts, understand. Brains, thought, are finite appearance, of Being, of You - Infinite.

Here I will refer to the text on the website. Read it all, maybe multiple times, and you will understand.

Quote

You can say “I am” and the sayer is not other than the one who knows this. 

“ I “ is one, not two. There is only one absolute reality.

The mind f is, everything I  just wrote is nonsense. 

Here I do not follow you. I is a word and a thought, creating a duality.

I am not replying in trying to show you are false, a lot of what you say I see it in the same way, but there are some things which you mix up or lack understanding of. I am just trying to help people understand themselves (meaning being consciousness) and what they experience.

Edited September 16, 2018 by Emanyalpsid

[Nahm]

@Emanyalpsid

“Nonexistence = the punchline”  Sometimes humor opens something up, sometimes it doesn’t. It was an attempt.

(Below...the bold comes off really bold. Sorry. Just using it as it’s easier on the eyes)  

 The known is the knower. There is not a “you” which is a product of a brain, that’s a thought of a “self”. 

 

33 minutes ago, Emanyalpsid said:

Thanks for your reply. I understand and second your list until the last one. There is consciousness, therefor existence, for what would consciousness be if it would not exist? Exactly!

Consciousness is not an entity, You have direct experience of consciousness not being an entity? What were you when you experienced this?

meaning something that has an existence, You have direct experience of something that does not exist?

that is capable of knowing anything. You have direct experience of consciousness not knowing anything? What knows that experience?

Consciousness is just awareness, as such, which arises through contact between the senses and an impulse (change in matter or energy) from outside or inside the body. The senses and impulses are both reality, also where the impulses come from is reality. Whatever you see is consciousness, however a rock itself is not consciousness. Just the seeing of the rock is consciousness. You have directly experienced this separation between consciousness & reality? In this experience, were you one or the other, or a third thing? 

Well if your heart stops pumping I'm pretty sure your consciousness is gone pretty fast. Have you experienced this, or is it a thought?

Therefore the body requires food, water, oxygen, a body temperature of 37 degrees, sleep etc. “If you encounter a dream lion, you better have a dream sword.”

In science they have a lot of evidence that the earth and the universe already existed before there was any life here; that means before we were able to be conscious of the things we experience. That is a thought / belief, (I acknowledge that seems obnoxious) I would suggest it’s evidence of consciousness, you. The “evidence” is consciousness, interpreted by consciousness - without the understanding of that factor, that the known IS the knower, there certainly does appear to be a past.

It is hard to follow your logic here as you make a distinction between consciousness, appearance of consciousness, and appearance of ignorance (appearance is reality?) Appearance is illusion, until it is seen as it is. Logic is inherently limited, or, finite. 

There are some logical thought steps missing for me to make sense of it. The last I understand and it is pretty easy to identify this process; light (magnetic waves) hits the lens in your eyeball, the things you see is based upon your surroundings, our eyes can distinct colours and forms and because we have two eyes we can project an 3d image. How your interpet what you see is based upon your desire for meaning, frame of reference, worldview etc. This is also all documented very well in science. Also the neurotransmitter activity in our brain, which creates our view, through the processing of light (energy) impulses are documented quite well. Neurologists are finding out more and more every day. You’re heavy handed on the science, simultaneously imposing the inherent limit of logic, and intensifying the maya. Go to your direct experience of now.      When I was a kid, there was a Santa Claus (thought/belief). As I aged, I discovered there is not a Santa Claus (direct experience). Once I had kids, it dawned on me, I’m f’n Santa Claus! (Actuality).

 

I will not repeat an explanation of consciousness and reality again and how they are linked. How are they linked?

For the explanation to people who are not aware of this, I believe it is a pretty necessary step to first identify both How?

and then show that they are interdendent. How?

Because people will not learn anything if you just state something without explaining how this came to be. You can tell a kid there’s no Santa Claus, or that there is a Santa Claus, or you can tell a kid he is Santa Claus. He won’t know which is true, without direct experience. 

Yeah but people already think, so to get them out of thinking, you will have to show where their desire for meaning, and therefore thinking, comes from. Fo. Sho. 

What i said earlier; consciousness exists, therefor it is created. This is ‘fundamental duality’. (Sorry)

I will repeat; an impulse from reality This is a very broad usage of the word reality. 

hits a sense, which is also in reality, which creates consciousness, which is also in reality. Describe your direct experience of this proccess. 

Reality is all there is, you are consciousness of reality, and your consciousness is being aware of reality. So indeed it is only one; reality. For what you experience is real. This hinges on one’s understanding of what is real.

Indeed with thinking one creates a duality. But the processes are there flowing in time. What is your direct experience of time? (Not things appearing to move & change, but of time, directly)

If you turn of the light or close your eyes, your sight will be gone. No, it’s just dark. 

If you say I am aware that I am aware, you are thinking you are aware. Because you need the mind to speak. Therefore you will get; I think and therefore I am. One creates a duality by thinking. I am, therefore I think. I am aware of the thought. 

In science, medicine, they figured this out some time ago. Check out the double slit if you haven’t already, see what that particular science is missing. And quantum eraser too. 

Ask some doctors who help people recover from an accident, paralysis, strokes etc.All deserving of compassion, and all, in total, appearance. 

Here I will refer to the text on the website. Read it all, maybe multiple times, and you will understand.

Here I do not follow you. I is a word and a thought, creating a duality. What does “ I “ point to?

I am not replying in trying to show you are false, I am your illusion, completely entirely fake & false, part of the problem here. No worries on taking anything personally. You should see the mud I get dragged through round here. Lol. I hope nothing I say offends you either. Doesn’t seem like it all. ❤️

a lot of what you say I see it in the same way, but there are some things which you mix up or lack understanding of. Absolutely. Seriously, I am quite happy in knowing nothing, and love such conversations, and learnings. 

I am just trying to help people understand themselves (meaning being consciousness) and what they experience. Me to! ? We’re all in this together. 

 

[Nahm]

@Emanyalpsid

“Nonexistence = the punchline”  Sometimes humor opens something up, sometimes it doesn’t. It was an attempt.

(Below...the bold comes off really bold. Sorry. Just using it as it’s easier on the eyes)  

 The known is the knower. There is not a “you” which is a product of a brain, that’s a thought of a “self”. 

 

33 minutes ago, Emanyalpsid said:

Thanks for your reply. I understand and second your list until the last one. There is consciousness, therefor existence, for what would consciousness be if it would not exist? Exactly!

Consciousness is not an entity, You have direct experience of consciousness not being an entity? What were you when you experienced this?

meaning something that has an existence, You have direct experience of something that does not exist?

that is capable of knowing anything. You have direct experience of consciousness not knowing anything? What knows that experience?

Consciousness is just awareness, as such, which arises through contact between the senses and an impulse (change in matter or energy) from outside or inside the body. The senses and impulses are both reality, also where the impulses come from is reality. Whatever you see is consciousness, however a rock itself is not consciousness. Just the seeing of the rock is consciousness. You have directly experienced this separation between consciousness & reality? In this experience, were you one or the other, or a third thing? 

Well if your heart stops pumping I'm pretty sure your consciousness is gone pretty fast. Have you experienced this, or is it a thought?

Therefore the body requires food, water, oxygen, a body temperature of 37 degrees, sleep etc. “If you encounter a dream lion, you better have a dream sword.”

In science they have a lot of evidence that the earth and the universe already existed before there was any life here; that means before we were able to be conscious of the things we experience. That is a thought / belief, (I acknowledge that seems obnoxious) I would suggest it’s evidence of consciousness, you. The “evidence” is consciousness, interpreted by consciousness - without the understanding of that factor, that the known IS the knower, there certainly does appear to be a past.

It is hard to follow your logic here as you make a distinction between consciousness, appearance of consciousness, and appearance of ignorance (appearance is reality?) Appearance is illusion, until it is seen as it is. Logic is inherently limited, or, finite. 

There are some logical thought steps missing for me to make sense of it. The last I understand and it is pretty easy to identify this process; light (magnetic waves) hits the lens in your eyeball, the things you see is based upon your surroundings, our eyes can distinct colours and forms and because we have two eyes we can project an 3d image. How your interpet what you see is based upon your desire for meaning, frame of reference, worldview etc. This is also all documented very well in science. Also the neurotransmitter activity in our brain, which creates our view, through the processing of light (energy) impulses are documented quite well. Neurologists are finding out more and more every day. You’re heavy handed on the science, simultaneously imposing the inherent limit of logic, and intensifying the maya. Go to your direct experience of now.      When I was a kid, there was a Santa Claus (thought/belief). As I aged, I discovered there is not a Santa Claus (direct experience). Once I had kids, it dawned on me, I’m f’n Santa Claus! (Actuality).

 

I will not repeat an explanation of consciousness and reality again and how they are linked. How are they linked?

For the explanation to people who are not aware of this, I believe it is a pretty necessary step to first identify both How?

and then show that they are interdendent. How?

Because people will not learn anything if you just state something without explaining how this came to be. You can tell a kid there’s no Santa Claus, or that there is a Santa Claus, or you can tell a kid he is Santa Claus. He won’t know which is true, without direct experience. 

Yeah but people already think, so to get them out of thinking, you will have to show where their desire for meaning, and therefore thinking, comes from. Fo. Sho. 

What i said earlier; consciousness exists, therefor it is created. This is ‘fundamental duality’. (Sorry)

I will repeat; an impulse from reality This is a very broad usage of the word reality. 

hits a sense, which is also in reality, which creates consciousness, which is also in reality. Describe your direct experience of this proccess. 

Reality is all there is, you are consciousness of reality, and your consciousness is being aware of reality. So indeed it is only one; reality. For what you experience is real. This hinges on one’s understanding of what is real.

Indeed with thinking one creates a duality. But the processes are there flowing in time. What is your direct experience of time? (Not things appearing to move & change, but of time, directly)

If you turn of the light or close your eyes, your sight will be gone. No, it’s just dark. 

If you say I am aware that I am aware, you are thinking you are aware. Because you need the mind to speak. Therefore you will get; I think and therefore I am. One creates a duality by thinking. I am, therefore I think. I am aware of the thought. 

In science, medicine, they figured this out some time ago. Check out the double slit if you haven’t already, see what that particular science is missing. And quantum eraser too. 

Ask some doctors who help people recover from an accident, paralysis, strokes etc.All deserving of compassion, and all, in total, appearance. 

Here I will refer to the text on the website. Read it all, maybe multiple times, and you will understand.

Here I do not follow you. I is a word and a thought, creating a duality. What does “ I “ point to?

I am not replying in trying to show you are false, I am your illusion, completely entirely fake & false, part of the problem here. No worries on taking anything personally. You should see the mud I get dragged through round here. Lol. I hope nothing I say offends you either. Doesn’t seem like it all. ❤️

a lot of what you say I see it in the same way, but there are some things which you mix up or lack understanding of. Absolutely. Seriously, I am quite happy in knowing nothing, and love such conversations, and learnings. 

I am just trying to help people understand themselves (meaning being consciousness) and what they experience. Me to! ? We’re all in this together. 

 

[Emanyalpsid]

12 hours ago, Nahm said:

Thanks for your reply. I understand and second your list until the last one. There is consciousness, therefor existence, for what would consciousness be if it would not exist? Exactly!

 

Consciousness is not an entity, You have direct experience of consciousness not being an entity? What were you when you experienced this?

meaning something that has an existence, You have direct experience of something that does not exist?

that is capable of knowing anything. You have direct experience of consciousness not knowing anything? What knows that experience?

You pulled apart one sentence, therefor destroyed it's meaning. I was saying that consciousness can have no knowledge, as it requires some'thing' to have knowledge.

Sorry about that.   I see that too. There’s truly Nothing to know.

Consciousness is just awareness, as such, which arises through contact between the senses and an impulse (change in matter or energy) from outside or inside the body. The senses and impulses are both reality, also where the impulses come from is reality. Whatever you see is consciousness, however a rock itself is not consciousness. Just the seeing of the rock is consciousness. You have directly experienced this separation between consciousness & reality? In this experience, were you one or the other, or a third thing? 

 

Yeah, every night when I fall asleep the sun sets in the West and when I wake up it rises in the East. When your consciousness and reality are separated you do not experience reality, as you are not conscious of it. But the sun is not in the West anymore when I wake up, so it must be separated from my consciousness when I am asleep. Also I was in a coma for 3 weeks when I was 9 years old, the earth continued without my consciousness. On the calendar it was 21 days later when I woke up. So, or all the people I know trick me into thinking 3 weeks went by and moved the calendar forward until this day, including the internet clock andsofort, or 3 weeks went by without me being concious. I'm pretty sure it is the last. 

 That’s like saying the refrigerator light is on when the door is closed. Assumption derrived on direct experience is not the same as having a peak inside the fridge when it’s closed. The difference between utilization of a mind, and seeing what the mind is. Time & physicality are not what they appear to be. 

No, that is direct experience; if you close your eyes, the sun is in the West. If you open your eyes again, the sun is in the East. If consciousness is separated from reality, when you sleep or are in a coma, there is no experience, as they are dependent upon eachother. But apparently there is a reality outside of consciousness, as the earth turns when you are unconscious, making the sun rise in the East if consciousness returns. 

Well if your heart stops pumping I'm pretty sure your consciousness is gone pretty fast. Have you experienced this, or is it a thought?

well from all the people who I knew who's heart stopped, I did not got a sign from them being conscious anymore. Pretty convincing for me to not try to experience this myself.

This is still materialist paradigm, implying consciousness is a product of brains. 

All the evidence out of science points into the direction that consciousness is formed in the brain, although I admit that this is no definite evidence. But my experience is, here I am referring to the sun experience above.

Therefore the body requires food, water, oxygen, a body temperature of 37 degrees, sleep etc. “If you encounter a dream lion, you better have a dream sword.”

Whatever floats your boat

In science they have a lot of evidence that the earth and the universe already existed before there was any life here; that means before we were able to be conscious of the things we experience. That is a thought / belief, (I acknowledge that seems obnoxious) I would suggest it’s evidence of consciousness, you. The “evidence” is consciousness, interpreted by consciousness - without the understanding of that factor, that the known IS the knower, there certainly does appear to be a past. 

If you would deny this, you would deny all of science and knowledge. A computer has no consciousness but is able to show phenomena, which we can interpret as evidence. Because we are able to experience things, they are real to us. The question whether they are real or not is not important, we experience them nonetheless. 

It’s not denial, there’s much more than science and knowing, infinitely more.      That’s what is important to you, it’s opinion / preference, not empirical. What if there are experiences outside of “experiences” prior to looking into one’s self to find out what’s real?  Reshaping what you previously referred to as “experience”.

Is said IF you would, of course science is limited, especially since they divided mental and physical processes, but that doesn't mean one should ignore empirical evidence. The last sentences I do not completely follow, but; experience is consciousness, if one changes the other does too, so they are not separate. I am using words, duality, here to explain the non-duality, or indefinitely. You can not define them separately, can't give meaning to them, so the essence of them is empty.

It is hard to follow your logic here as you make a distinction between consciousness, appearance of consciousness, and appearance of ignorance (appearance is reality?) Appearance is illusion, until it is seen as it is. Logic is inherently limited, or, finite.

 before you spoke of appearance as reality? Logic is limited by ones understanding.

I agree with you there. Logic itself is also deeply limited. 

There are some logical thought steps missing for me to make sense of it. The last I understand and it is pretty easy to identify this process; light (magnetic waves) hits the lens in your eyeball, the things you see is based upon your surroundings, our eyes can distinct colours and forms and because we have two eyes we can project an 3d image. How your interpet what you see is based upon your desire for meaning, frame of reference, worldview etc. This is also all documented very well in science. Also the neurotransmitter activity in our brain, which creates our view, through the processing of light (energy) impulses are documented quite well. Neurologists are finding out more and more every day. You’re heavy handed on the science, simultaneously imposing the inherent limit of logic, and intensifying the maya. Go to your direct experience of now.      When I was a kid, there was a Santa Claus (thought/belief). As I aged, I discovered there is not a Santa Claus (direct experience). Once I had kids, it dawned on me, I’m f’n Santa Claus! (Actuality).

Natural sciences are based on emperical evidence not logic.

Especially in terms of consciousness, science is limited in the bigger picture, beyond the physicality.

Agreed.

I will not repeat an explanation of consciousness and reality again and how they are linked. How are they linked?

please read my previous posts or the text on the website.

 

For the explanation to people who are not aware of this, I believe it is a pretty necessary step to first identify both How?

Please read the website.

and then show that they are interdendent. How?

Idem

Because people will not learn anything if you just state something without explaining how this came to be. You can tell a kid there’s no Santa Claus, or that there is a Santa Claus, or you can tell a kid he is Santa Claus. He won’t know which is true, without direct experience. 

Yeah but figuring out the non-self, non-duality, and understanding the nature of reality are mental processes, Therefore an useful explanation on how the mind works can greatly benefit all people. As fundamentally the mind works the same for all people. How and why? Read the text. 

Direct experience, not ‘figuring out’. How many minds have you experienced? This is Maya.

Through figuring out being able to have a direct experience. I keep explaining the same things which are already written out on the website. So to save both of use time, I hope you will read it sometime. I will stop responding to this message after this, as I have other things to do and everything I explain here is also explained on the website.

Yeah but people already think, so to get them out of thinking, you will have to show where their desire for meaning, and therefore thinking, comes from. Fo. Sho. 

What i said earlier; consciousness exists, therefor it is created. This is ‘fundamental duality’. (Sorry)

For something to be perceived, it has to be there so it can be perceived. Else it can not be perceived. If it is there, it must be created. We need thoughts, words, or concepts to explain non-duality, by doing so creating a duality to assist in the process. That is also why I stated previously that one has to define consciousness and reality first to then show they are not separate. So that people can learn their mental processes by comprehending the concepts they use in their thinking. In order to experience non-duality and feel enlightened. But it seems you are not getting what I am pointing out here.  

What do you really mean “there”? Who is perceiving?  No words, thoughts, or concepts can explain nonduality. There is no one to explain it to. Consciousness is undefinable, infinite, and you, minus the thinking & logic (appearance). Thinking veils. I feel I understand where you’re coming from. 

With there I mean somewhere, just calling it reality, to be perceived. Consciousness is perceiving. Well I beg to differ, non-duality can be explained by showing the mutual dependency of concepts, in doing so, the essence of them becomes empty, hence non-duality can be experienced, as thinking will lose its meaning.  Again, please read the website, it will only take you up to 2 till 3 hours. Although, you will be confronted with your own convictions, letting go is the key. Don't be scared.

 

Quote

I will repeat; an impulse from reality This is a very broad usage of the word reality. 

Everything that our senses can detect.

 

hits a sense, which is also in reality, which creates consciousness, which is also in reality. Describe your direct experience of this proccess. 

I refer to my previous sun example 

I’m not sure if you have clarity between what is directly experience and what is a thought. How does reality “hit a sense”? What “happens” there? 

Reality is all there is, you are consciousness of reality, and your consciousness is being aware of reality. So indeed it is only one; reality. For what you experience is real. This hinges on one’s understanding of what is real.

What you experience is 'real' because you experience it. The question if it is 'real' or not is not important,  it does not change your experience  . Also what real is, is not important , you experience it. If your experience changes, what is real changes ... You see the circular reasoning right?

 You really gotta see more. 

Indeed with thinking one creates a duality. But the processes are there flowing in time. What is your direct experience of time? (Not things appearing to move & change, but of time, directly)

Time cannot be seen separate from space, Einstein showed this magnificently. Else it also would exist on itself, creating a duality. I refer to the physical processes there, which are possible in space (dimensions), therefore I used the term flowing, as they are moving through space-time. Everything you experience is in space-time, but i refer to the text here. 

 You yourself, can experience consciousness without spacetime. You can also look into quantum mechanics that proceeded relativity. 

If you turn of the light or close your eyes, your sight will be gone. No, it’s just dark.

Yeah but you see no-thing.

True. Lol  

If you say I am aware that I am aware, you are thinking you are aware. Because you need the mind to speak. Therefore you will get; I think and therefore I am. One creates a duality by thinking. I am, therefore I think. I am aware of the thought. 

Ah I get you here, indeed.

In science, medicine, they figured this out some time ago. Check out the double slit if you haven’t already, see what that particular science is missing. And quantum eraser too. 

Ask some doctors who help people recover from an accident, paralysis, strokes etc.All deserving of compassion, and all, in total, appearance. 

Here I will refer to the text on the website. Read it all, maybe multiple times, and you will understand.

Here I do not follow you. I is a word and a thought, creating a duality. What does “ I “ point to?

The ego, but it is a word therefore creating a duality.

That is worth looking into. 

That is what page 1 till 6 is all about. Page 7 till 11 is explaining reality. Page 12 shows the mutual dependency of concepts and therefore the emptiness of essence. Which in turn dissolves ones desire to thinking, opening one up to direct experience or non-duality. Everything is explained in their non-duality, meaning here that you can not separate them; space-time, matter-gravity, life-environment, body-senses, consciousness-reality.

This is my last response on this message, as I have other things to attend to and this takes up too much time and it is already explained on the website. I do not want to convince you, I hope you are happy. But there are a lot of people, who are mixed up, don't know what others are talking about, do not know how to get further. On the website everything is explained, not only in a logical sense, but from experiential knowledge gained by the reader. It shows, in detail, that reality is non-dual. You say that it can not be explained, I say and show that it can. That you do not understand this, or do not want to understand, as you might lost connection to reality, that is your thing. Read and judge for yourself, instead of doubting something you have not experienced.

Some people need more guidance, as they have trouble looking through themselves and reality. But it can also help people who are lost, because they did not have a wise guide and experienced some things, psychedelic induced or not, and started to believe what they experienced in a brief moment on a blissfull high. As a child seeing santa Claus. Of course for the child Santa is real, but we know that the nature of santa is just a guy in suit with a fake beard who acts like he is. The same is for people who believe in enlightenment, if they experience non-duality, psychedelics induced or not, it is real, but they do not understand the nature of it. For if they understand, the believe in enlightenment will be gone, just as the believe in santa for a child.

I am not replying in trying to show you are false, I am your illusion, completely entirely fake & false, part of the problem here. No worries on taking anything personally. You should see the mud I get dragged through round here. Lol. I hope nothing I say offends you either. Doesn’t seem like it all. ❤️

a lot of what you say I see it in the same way, but there are some things which you mix up or lack understanding of. Absolutely. Seriously, I am quite happy in knowing nothing, and love such conversations, and learnings. 

I am just trying to help people understand themselves (meaning being consciousness) and what they experience. Me too! ? We’re all in this together. 

12 hours ago, Nahm said:

@Emanyalpsid

“Nonexistence = the punchline”  Sometimes humor opens something up, sometimes it doesn’t. It was an attempt.

(Below...the bold comes off really bold. Sorry. Just using it as it’s easier on the eyes)  

 The known is the knower. There is not a “you” which is a product of a brain, that’s a thought of a “self”. 

 

 

 

Edited September 17, 2018 by Emanyalpsid

[Emanyalpsid]

@Nahm I replied on your response, which you edited in my post, by editing this post for myself again with the underlined text. See the post above.

Edited September 17, 2018 by Emanyalpsid

[Nahm]

@Emanyalpsid ??

There’s a trigger of “then you have lost touch with reality” engaged when physicality comes into question which appears to be keeping you from going further. Fear is the nature of deflection. It appears to you I don’t understand what you’re saying, because of the materialist paradigm. At least consider that I do, and see if a pointer is noticed.  Trips and or retreats would open a whole new world up to you, you already know this though. You stand to see that it is not possible to ‘loose touch with reality’, and that you are not accidental in the universe, you are essential. Thank you for the convo! 

[Emanyalpsid]

Keeps me from going further? Further away from reality you mean? Dude, I loved the conversation with you. But there is nothing beyond understanding the nature of reality, that is bodhisvatta/Buddha nature. But I see the people believing in absolute infinity, enlightenment, only consciousness, astral planes, infinite dimensions, spiral Dynamics, anthropology, etc. the same as Christian's, Catholics, and Muslims. There is no evidence to sustain their believes, outside of their experience, as they feel the presence of a god.

If you deny the creation of the universe and planets as being a universe which everyone perceives, you limit yourself to your consciousness and denying reality. Thereby denying science as a whole, and all the evidence it brought for over 2000 years, by not the dumbest people. If you told this to any Buddhist he would say it would be very foolish to deny reality and therefore your body. But do whatever you like. You can only try once to see if your consciousness is still there if your heart stops pumping. But you are not going to try to find that out do you? Because deep down you know this is real. Therefore your body does everything in its power to stay alive.

The difference between being insane or being a genius lies in the ability to make yourself understandable by the common man. Try explaining how you see yourself and the world to your barber or grocery guy, if he understands you, well there might be some truth into it. If you cannot explain yourself, or anything, in a simple manner, you do not understand it very well.

This will also be my last post on this forum, as it seems you all, based upon reading posts in various other topics, took the changes psychedelics induces in the brain, and what it does to your imagination, a bit too seriously. Causing you to drift away from reality into your own world. Or your childhood was that fucked up you drifted away in your own imagination in that way, looking for meaning anywhere. Or even worse, a combination of the two. But of course there are more people drifting away, maybe if you are with enough you can start a religion, call it; absolute infinity. You can then say that people who do not understand you are ignorant, because they did not experience what you have experienced. The fools.

 

5 hours ago, Nahm said:

@Emanyalpsid ??

There’s a trigger of “then you have lost touch with reality” engaged when physicality comes into question which appears to be keeping you from going further. Fear is the nature of deflection. It appears to you I don’t understand what you’re saying, because of the materialist paradigm. At least consider that I do, and see if a pointer is noticed.  Trips and or retreats would open a whole new world up to you, you already know this though. You stand to see that it is not possible to ‘loose touch with reality’, and that you are not accidental in the universe, you are essential. Thank you for the convo! 

Tha@Emanyalpsid

Edited September 17, 2018 by Emanyalpsid

[Nahm]

 

@Emanyalpsid

‘Needing’ evidence or others’ understanding &  misunderstanding self inquiry as a dogma, - this is “ego backlash”, be done with it man, put it down by going into it, examine the sensation, decode what the trigger was, you’ll be very glad you did. There is a life that of effortless heartstrong freedom, fulfilled in unification, vulnerable & childlike, in which the imagination is the most effective tool. That’s the life you want, wether you’ve been that honest with yourself yet or not. This is why you came here, and everything is working out like it’s supposed to. No more running. Hang around for a bit. You will see.  Or don’t.    Blue pill - red pill, it doesn’t “matter”. 

I love the conversation with you too. ??

[Forestluv]

On 9/15/2018 at 5:49 AM, Emanyalpsid said:

Non-duality means just not dual or one. With thinking, you are creating a duality between the thought and what you think about. So non-duality only exists without thought, because if something is mentioned by a thought or word, it is defined. In doing so, breaking one (reality) into two (subjective and objective reality), therefore creating a duality.

The difficulty speaking about nonduality is that language is dual. Every statement you make about nonduality, you would need to also say it's the opposite (at the very least). Every word you use is dual (it is not another word). Balancing every statement out becomes tiresome and nonsensical.

In your example:

"Non-duality only exists without thought" AND "Non-duality only exists with thought"

One way to balance this out is to turn each statement back on itself:

"The idea nonduality only exists without thought IS the idea nonduality only exists without thought."

This is only a half-step, yet it can highlight that each of your statements is saying X is Y. By turning the statement back on itself we are saying X is X. 

At best, we can only point to nonduality with partial truths.

That is why zen monks often have nonsensical answers to students' questions. To break the mind's obsession with language, reason and images. When asked "What is nonduality?" a zen monk might drop an apple to the floor, he might ask the student "what was your face before you were born?", he may slap the student across the face or he may fart and giggle. The words and actions are just pointers. Yet, the mind can still become attached and analyze. . . "Hmmm, was nonduality the fart or the giggle? Maybe nonduality is the integration of fart and giggle. No, perhaps nonduality is the transcendence of the fart to humor. Yet, what if the giggle came before the fart?  Could nonduality be the transcendence of the giggle? . . . And on and on and on for months, years, decades. . . 

Don't get attached and bogged down with the words. Don't waste months or years of your time chasing farts and giggles. Direct experience of nonduality is 1 million times more powerful than any words.

[LaraGreenbridge]

@Serotoninluv ,

It's great that you used the example of Zen Buddhist monks when explaining non-duality.

Note that said monks live in highly organised communities with a social hierarchy, customs and processes. They are honoured members of a bigger social order, and live to some extent off donations. They also do some community work and help people in need.

They have in no way vacated the physical world! The do not live on concepts alone!  They work! They live regular lives. They eat and breath. They even have personalities.

I do think there is some slight danger in ignoring the physical realities of life, as though our lives are irrelevant. 

[cirkussmile]

Non duality: Being peaceful, happy and a heart full of love. The past can not hurt you and worries about the future is gone. 

Short, simple and everyone can understand what is being talked about. No prior knowledge is necessary.

 

Then thinking happens and says: “How can I get that?” And there one goes from eternal freedom to ignorance in less then one second.

[LaraGreenbridge]

2 minutes ago, cirkussmile said:

Non duality: Being peaceful, happy and a heart full of love. The past can not hurt you and worries about the future is gone. 

Short, simple and everyone can understand what is being talked about. No prior knowledge is necessary.

 

Then thinking happens and says: “How can I get that?” And there one goes from eternal freedom to ignorance in less then one secoond.

"a heart full of love" 

Such a beautiful statement, @cirkussmile!

and I think love leads to compassion, to dealing compassionately with the world, and indeed, with all beings. Love is active. It is useful.... not simply a concept.

[cirkussmile]

13 minutes ago, LaraGreenbridge said:

"a heart full of love" 

Such a beautiful statement, @cirkussmile!

and I think love leads to compassion, to dealing compassionately with the world, and indeed, with all beings. Love is active. It is useful.... not simply a concept.

It is not a fairytale or something that people just say because Love is the answer. 

Peace my brother ??

[Forestluv]

1 hour ago, LaraGreenbridge said:

@Serotoninluv ,

It's great that you used the example of Zen Buddhist monks when explaining non-duality.

Note that said monks live in highly organised communities with a social hierarchy, customs and processes. They are honoured members of a bigger social order, and live to some extent off donations. They also do some community work and help people in need.

They have in no way vacated the physical world! The do not live on concepts alone!  They work! They live regular lives. They eat and breath. They even have personalities.

I do think there is some slight danger in ignoring the physical realities of life, as though our lives are irrelevant. 

For sure. I've had non-dual experiences and there is NO WAY I could do even the most basic activities and inter-personal communication in a nondual mindset. Duality is a necessary tool to survive in a relative world. There are humorous videos online about what it would look like to live in a permanent nondual mindset.