A thread for non-dual videos

q, can you help me to understand what's behind the resistance to answer a civilly posed, direct question in a conversation about Nonduality?

Notice as you read that question and consider your answer, there is very likely gonna be a sense of aversion that immediately arises, to actually answering it. And that is because, whatever answer you offer, is going to indicate the presence of a personally airising impetus to maintain a stance of NOT appearing to be "self-identified."

Any reason you can come up with, is going to hinge upon a very personal judgment...a very personal sense of resistance to taking an honest and sincere, inquiring gander into your own position/viewpoint.

There is a reason I never shy away from answering any question posed to me during Truth-talk...and that is because I am not afraid of taking that honest gander and honestly, sincerely reporting back, what I see.

Those who balk at answering civilly posted, sincere, direct questions during a convo about Truth/Nonduality, are demonstrating the presence of "guardedness" regarding their position...that right there is what is begging to be looked at!

It's actually an incredible opportunity when in a discussion/debate about Truth, if a sense arises of wanting to avoid answering....a sense arises to turn and hide....to deny the question/challenge. That right there is your indicator that the SVP is present! To deny that is to turn back into the dream-scape to seek refuge.

My question was not actually directed specifically to you, here, as we are conversing. It was a query as to why you think folks on a nonduality forum, who are clearly focused on Truth, would refuse to answer a particular question that is posed in a direct, but very civil and impersonal manner. There are not really any reasons that would not invoke ego...an intent to escape a question that threatens a sacred idea.

But let's take your answer above. Yes, at present as you're engaging me here, it's quite clear that questions and assertions are very specifically focused on your disgust/irritation towards me...the way I engage and behave and your intent to try to....hmmm...not exactly sure here....shame me? Get me to change my behavior? Explain myself in a way that allows you to understand? What's your aim here q?



Ah, okay...so your aim here is to try "understand" where I am coming from?

Well, right out the gates here the problem; You are erroneously seeing/imagining "identification with mental concepts" and you've taken certain pointers and assertions made in conversations about Nonduality, and misinterpreted what's actually being said/pointed to.

Freedom from all mental concepts, does not mean the complete and total end/annihilation of all mental concepts. It does mean though, seeing mental concepts for what they are....absent inherent Truth....empty...

The world and all it's things, all mental concepts, ideas, intellectual musings, even imaginings, need not "disappear" to be "FREE" from all of 'em. Liberation does not mean the disappearance of the world...just transcendence of the world. The world continues to appear, even as you are free/liberated from it.

What do you think it means to no longer "live conceptually"...? That is a very odd phrasing. Experience, like it or not, involves concepts. And that's not a problem. It's true, being awake generally means less in the way of self-referential, play by play type chitter-chatter as well as unnecessary mental overlays heaped upon what presents, as experience unfolds, but it does NOT mean the complete cessation of concepts/conceptualization...all thought/mentation/mind content.

It's the apprehension of fundamental Truth that is "non-conceptual." The conceptual is not the enemy. Mistaking concepts for something other than appearance only, is the problem. Like it or not, to some degree, To experience is to conceptualize....experience involves engagement with concepts.

So long as there is still experience arising, concepts and minding are still also in play. What is NOT still in play is mistaking the conceptual...that which is appearance only, for Absolute Truth.

Do you have direct knowledge of what it means to live in "complete" spontaneity and confidence..? Methinks you're speaking from a seekers position and trying to imagine what it's like to be awake.

Sure, generally speaking, relatively, comparatively speaking, there is far greater spontaneity (absence of pondering and weighing presenting paths and avenues that support intent) however, that doesn't mean there is "never" minding about what's presenting......and yes, there is confidence in the sense that absent erroneously imagined separation/limitation, it's very clear that ultimately, all is as it fundamentally is...essentially perfect, regardless of surface appearing/arising conditions.

What about my responding to posts on a public forum, with challenge, and pointing away from what i see to be delusion, towards Truth, has you so seeing an absence of spontaneity and a lack of confidence?

Just because one can confidently state assertions about what it means to be awake, does not mean they are necessarily attached to those assertions or identified with concepts. That's where you go wrong. You are conflating confident assertions of pointers to Truth, with the presence of attachment....an SVP.

You have some silly ideas, is all. That's often what happens though when one who is not yet awake hears Nonduality pointers....it's just the way it is. If the seeker could completely grasp/directly and know precisely what the pointers are pointing to....there's no longer be seeking/sense of being a seeker.

Because life is what it is, and peeps move as they are moved. Seems that for some reason you are not at peace with and accepting of that reality.

[/b]

I'm not the one belly-aching about what is...YOU ARE! Can't you see that?

An interest in pointing away from delusion to Truth does not equal "a failure to be at peace...a failure to accept reality."

I accepted the reality of being booted and banned from ST, and accepted that I continued to have an interest in the content of the conversations/debates I was partaking in there, so I created my own forum/blog, so I continue to point away from those delusions.

I fully understand how from a personal vantage point, it does very much "appear to be" personal....that's because from a personal vantage point, viewpoints and mind-content, shared on a forum, are regarded to be "mine"...."owned by me"....."an expression of MY most sacred ideas."

That all changes when self-identification is seen through and is no longer, when the primary locus of seeing is "beyond/prior to" all mind content...all appearance...all perceivables.

Your version of me 'accepting reality,' is; Figgles denies her interest in continuing the conversation to continue to point away from delusion to Truth, on grounds that people like q and a few others, take personal issue with her continued response to their postings.

It is precisely that "taking offense/having a personal issue with" an uninvited response to your publicly shared viewpoint that is begging to be inquired into!

I promise you, I would have zero issue with anyone taking my words/views from this forum and using them to point to what is deemed to be a higher Truth, or even a delusion. I would actually relish the opportunity to dispassionately, sincerely consider and respond to what's being asserted.

The fact that there are folks who are butt-hurt over my appraisal of and responses to, their attempts to point to Truth, bothers me not one iota. It's just another example of how suffering has "an imagined separate entity/person...complete with all sorts of personal judgments and deep aversions...all sorts of shoulds/should nots" inherent to it.