Jeff Foster's "Brown Bear"

The brown bear, actually, IS wrong..or better said, "deluded"...and not EVEN "half circle," as one who is using the supposedly realized "emptiness/absence of inherent existence of all perceivables," as a means to then deny and eschew experiential content, has clearly NOT had a realization at all and is merely conceptualizing Nonduality pointers.

So called "half circle," is the seeing through of inherent existence of all perceivables....it's a loss, not a gain of new knowledge, and the brown-bear has taken on new knowledge 'about' all appearances being empty and he then applies that knowledge as a judgment 'about/against' the appearing world.

The 'brown bear' video is an admonishment to those who might fall into the "advaita trap," which is gobbling up Oneness pointers and conceptualizing them, and then mis-applying those concepts in a way that denigrades/denies the phenomenal.




Indeed, following SR/awakening, life is NOT lived bouncing between two contexts...nor from purely an impersonal/Absolute context...(that's the mistake of the deluded brown-bear)....the relative is now couched within the Absolute/impersonal, and is not denied...there is no need to deny the appearing world in order to be free from it....what IS required is to see the inherent emptiness....the absence of inherent existence.

It's interesting, your own insistence that IF there was truly a void/absence of knowledge regarding Absolute knowing of the experience/perception relative to appearing people and things, then that should equal the end of engaging those people and things 'as though' they really are experiencing/perceiving, invokes the fallacies/delusions of the brown-bear.

The brown-bears motto is: If it's an empty appearance only, they it must be denied....ignored. And that's the stance you took as you made that stupid argument.




You're spot on there about the brown bear being stuck in a story.

But obviously, very much disagree that this forum is "brown bear central." Why would you say that? What have I written here that indicates a denial of the relative...a denial or denigration...an ignoring of the appearing world?

This is the same assertion that so many make against Nonduality in general as pointers to emptiness are mistaken to be a denial of the phenomenal.

It is NOT a denial of the phenomenal to point out that nothing that appears has it's own inherent existence.....it is not a denial of the phenomenal to point out that the quality of aliveness....knowledge of unique, discrete, individuated personal experience/perception re: others, can only ever be relative knowledge.

The brown bear leaves much more than that!



I think it's important not to give any credence to the brown-bear position in terms of having actually realized/seen through anything at all of importance relative to Nonduality.

The pointer of Oneness has no relationship to the stance of 'negating/ignoring' the appearing world that the brown-bear position takes.

The person who uses Nonduality pointers (conceptualizing them, obviously) for the purpose of trying to distance and insulate himself from the facets of his world that threaten his sense of peace, is really no different at all from the person who uses concepts to try to "connect/unify" all apparent things and include himself, as a person within that, in order to feel better about life.

In both cases, there is a reification of the separate person.

Eschewing/denying/denigrading/ignoring that which appears has nothing to do with seeing through the delusion of separation....seeing the emptiness of inherent existence re: all appearance.

I think if there is one thing worthy of stressing to the seeker, this is it....so many conceptualize Nonduality pointers and arrive at a conclusion that there is a denial of experience involved. There is not. AT all.

To be free of the appearing world is not to deny any of that which appears. It really is about seeing through that which was erroneously believed to actually BE appearing, when in actuality, it never was...

The seeker believer that fundamental separation really is making an appearance....really is a facet of his experience, when in reality, it was only ever imagined...and with that erroneous imagining, himself, as a separate, volitional person, was also being imagined. What is NOT being imagined, is the appearing me character...body/mind/person. All of that Does appear within/to the abiding ground of awareness. There is no need to deny any of that which appears....all that is required is to see that it arises 'within/to' Awareness....no separation....awareness abiding as ground, and appearance as ephemeral, temporal, never itself abiding/unchanging...always changing as the story unfolds.

Well, ultimately, we're talking about an absence...and there is no "giving up an absence." Who/what would, after all, give it up? What is there TO give up?


But yes, the 'notion' that you can't make it happen, carried around as a relative idea, brought up into conversations outside of Nonduality/Truth-talk, amounts to brown-bearism at it's finest.

There really is very little point in even mentioning this to one who is intent upon improving his experience 'cause it's only gonna thwart that sense of improved experience.

I think self-help teachings that support seekers in their search for a better/improved experience often get a bad rap from those interested in talking about/writing about/pointing to Truth/nonduality. There's nothing wrong with a seeker acknowledging where he's at, trying to find ways to have a better dream, nor with another wanting to be a part of that experience.

It is interesting though, how bent out of shape seekers often get when they are offered the advice to stick with self-help teachings because they are clearly angered by Truth-talk/Nonduality pointers, thus, obviously not truly, sincerely interested in seeing what's actually so.

Anyone who is still arguing for and getting angry in Nonduality discussion, when their LOA beliefs or practice/process/causality beliefs are challenged, is obviously still more interested in relative betterment...feeling good/nice, than they are in Truth. And really, that's ok. Now if only they could see it that way.