What is Nonduality?

[@bunterchild1205]

Yikes, I have never thought about consciousness in this way. Rough paraphrase 'Everyone elses consciousness is your consciousness'. I cant decide to be comforted or existentially terrified :) Thank you for another thought provoking segment. I don't understand everything you discuss, but your talks are making me want to.

[@JamesLarcey]

Yes, you paraphrased it well. I agree it's terrifying really, and comforting somehow. In some ways more terrifying than comforting. Enlightened people generally seem quite happy though, so I guess it's probably a feeling of completion when we understand it completely.

[@AdriansRevenge]

Why did You remove my comment on your video? Are you afraid that people might realize how much you don't know? Instead of my comment being removed at the speed of light, you could have left it so that people can really learn something and you along with them.

[@JamesLarcey]

I haven't removed any comments

[@JamesLarcey]

I checked and I can't see any comments by you. Try again. You can say what you want, I'm sure everyone will benefit from what you have to say. I could learn something too.

[@AdriansRevenge]

@@JamesLarcey I put again so we will see.

[@Arvy111]

Super interesting again. The way I see it is there is only ONE consciousness and that ONE consciousness is ALL ( everything). However, we have this earthly material like experience to experience ego. That is to experience joy and fear, love and hate, rich and poor, health and sickness, war and peace , hot and cold, up and down etc etc.. None have actual reality however the experience is real ( appears real) and provides us a journey of soul growth. How could we know bliss if we never experience misery?

[@JamesLarcey]

Yes, that's excellent. I agree. These emotions arise together and are to some degree dependent on each other. I also imagine that they are all some sort of value, high or low, but basically value. In this way I argue for value: truth, beauty or goodness as the foundation of reality.

[@Sunvy101]

The wildest conclusion I get from this is that the only way to completely get rid of the ego is through death. Because the body is like a primitive ego. Psycological ego is the meta ego. This might encourage someone to seek death. But seeking death without committing to it can make you miserable in its own way. Because the very act of "seeking" could be the root of misery. For example: seeking for pleasure, seeking to get rid of pain, seeking for peace, etc. The act of seeking indicates resistance to something. The "act of resistance" is the same as the experience of pain. Seeking and resistance seem to be two sides of the same coin. When you seek to aquire a state of mind, you create resistant to another by definition. Therefore you create room for pain. When you seek you also create the ego in a sense. Because the ego has a form but the "I" doesn't. When the "I" seeks a state of mind, it's seeking a specific conscious experience with certain properties. Those properties give the "I" a form. This form has the desire to retain its own shape. Because by definition a form only has a shape when it tends to stay that way. It retains its shape through resistance to encountering a sudden change in its own shape. What's exactly why it hurts when your ego is threatened. The process of death is also painful because the ego gets flattened in the process. losing its identification with the form of the body.

[@JamesLarcey]

Wow, that's very profound. I agree that the ego probably only goes when we die. I think it serves a function like our kidneys. The problem comes when mistake ourselves for the ego. Your analysis is very impressive. I agree, you seem to have captured well how the ego works and gives the impression of a form.

[@henryjraymondiii961]

There is only one thing. There never was a 2; not even so called "elementary particles". All is comprised by relative positions. One plus one equals a larger...One". One big thing. Each seeming identicality is in a different space/same large space . Even attempting position description is a compromise. There is not ultimate summation, only what is, seeming to seem., large and small.

[@JamesLarcey]

Yes, that's very deep. Thank you.