The Most Direct and Best of Non-Duality Introductions by Emerson Non-duality

Speaker A: 00:00:00

SA so welcome everyone. For those that are new, this is not your regular Q A non duality. This is more of a direct invitation just to go into that spaciousness.

I'll do an introduction. Now for a drink of Coke. So this expression of an in between inherently implies a duality, an intermediary state bridging two opposing forces or idea.

Yet upon closer examination, this notion disintegrates under the weight of its own assumption. In the non dual framework, there is no intermediary, no bridge, and fundamentally no opposites to bridge.

The so called in between is a conceptual mirage, a construct of thought that dissolves into a startlingly obvious directness. There have never been opposites in the first place.

This is not a realization that can be captured by intellectual analysis or philosophical discourse.

Rather, it presents itself as an unthinkable directness, a raw, immediate direct isness that transcends the boundaries of logic and reason, rendering them irrelevant. So this directness is not an experience to be attained or truth to be understood.

It's a soft, all encompassing, radiant peace that exists entirely beyond the need for comprehension. It neither demands the mind's assent nor offers itself up for scrutiny.

In this space of profound simplicity, there is a humbling acknowledgment that there is nothing to realize. The very idea of realization presupposes a subject who realizes an object to be realized, a duality that collapses in the face of this boundlessness.

I don't know what to call it anymore. What emerges instead is a spark of contentment that appears infinite in its scope. It's a quiet, enduring peace that neither begins nor ends.

This is neither a nihilistic negation that denies the value of existence, nor a grand illusion that inflate it with imaginary significance. It is not a philosophical stance or a spiritual goal or a metaphysical claim. It neither accepts the world as it is nor rejects it.

In fact, even to describe this as just this is to fall into the trap of conceptualization. The phrase just this implies a finality, a definitive answer or a definitive pointer.

But in this ineffable isness, even such simplicity is an unnecessary addition.

Moreover, to append the popular non dual refrain but for no one introduces an arrogance, an implicit hierarchy of understanding that subtly reinforces the very separation it seeks to dissolve. In this intimate, silent vastness, all words become noise, faint echoes of a mind attempting to grasp what cannot be grasped.

Words, after all, are just tools of differentiation, dividing and categorizing experience into knowable parts. Yet here in the undivided is ness, there is no Differentiation, no fragmentation, language falters, and all that remains is the ineffable.

Thus there are no words to adequately express this non dual, whatever you might want to call it. There is no in between. The in between, because the in between itself is a fiction of thought.

What is left, when all conceptual frameworks are relinquished, is an unmediated immediacy, an unspeakable simplicity that defies articulation.

In this space, where human constructs completely dissolve, the boundaries that seekers perceive between self and other, subject and object, movement and stillness, are revealed as mere illusions, mental constructs that lose their solidity under close examination. Even the mind itself, that seemingly authoritative arbiter of reality, is a construct. It exists only as a fleeting phenomenon.

Does a painting like mistake under the scrutiny of deeper looking. In this dissolution, what is encountered can only be described as an infinite question mark, a boundless space where all distinctions collapse.

So this meeting is going to be a whole bunch of, I don't knows, a bunch of things that cannot be said. A speechlessness, a direct immediacy. So if you would like to participate, just raise your hand or simply unmute and we'll go at it. Hooray.

It's lovingly and passionately being expressed here is the fundamental unreality of words and their role in constructing and perpetuating the illusion of duality. So, stripped of all conceptual overlays, the essence of what is reveals itself as devoid of words.

Words, being mere constructs, lack inherent truth or falsity. They're simply appearances at their core.

They are mechanisms of division, creating the illusion of two non duality, often reduced to the phrase of not to underscores the absence of division. Yet even the term non duality is itself a construct, a word attempting to signify what is beyond words.

So words derive their apparent significance from an endless referential loop where in one word is defined by others. This circularity mirrors the illusory nature of reality as conceptualized through language.

Reality, nothing, awareness, consciousness, enlightenment, emptiness. These are all terms steeped in cultural, spiritual, non dual or philosophical context. Yet they remain merely as words.

They serve to uphold the illusion of a self, a construct that exists only in thought, a construct that only exists in thought itself. Composed of words, the self, often perceived as a core identity or essence or a sense of self, is a linguistic artifact.

Statements such as I am, I have a sense of self, or nothing appearing as everything I am aware of. Awareness are grounded in words that point to further abstractions. Nothing, awareness, truth and suffer, all linguistic constructs.

I'm just going to mute, yes, they masquerade as concrete realities. This reliance on words creates an intricate architecture of belief systems, an empire of words that serves to maintain the illusion of separation.

At the root of this empire lies the concept of a creator or a source, a notion that itself is a linguistic fabrication. Words are self perpetuating. They emerge from the illusion of separation and reinforce it over and over and over again.

Concepts such as nothing, consciousness, awareness or source, or examples of this recursive fabrication.

Even the term nothing, often romanticized in spiritual or non dual discourse, is a word, a product of the same illusory process it seems to seeks to dismantle. While I was talking to this teacher, he kept on saying, nothing, nothing, nothing. So the allure of words lies in their capacity to convey meaning.

Yet meaning itself is a construct. The resonance often associated with profound spiritual, non dual philosophical insights is not found in the words, but in their absence.

True resonance emerges in the energetic silence that underlies the linguistic facade, not as a transmission. Words attempt to describe this silence, but ultimately fail. And the very act of description perpetuates separation.

This insight leads to radical deconstruction of concepts such as truth, reality and the self.

Truth, for instance, requires the existence of its opposite, falsehood, but which both of them are constructs of falsity and Sorry, I'm going to respond to that in a moment, just a second.

The self similarly is a linguistic invention that sustains its apparent reality by aligning with other constructs, such as the higher self enlightenment. Put anywhere there no thing. These ideas are not wrong or right.

They're simply linguistic phenomena that obscures the obvious, the absence of division.

When words become the foundation of belief systems, they create hierarchies and positions such as those occupied by so called enlightened masters, spiritual teachers, nobody speaker. These roles are constructs born of the same linguistic architecture that sustains the illusion of separation.

So even the concept of non duality, often framed as the ultimate truth, becomes another belief system when confined to a language. It becomes jargon, it becomes dogma, it becomes another idea.

What is being suggested here is not a rejection of words, but a recognition of their limits. Words are tools that can be used to dismantle the very structure they uphold.

Much like a word assassin, not of non duality police that doesn't do anything but to eliminate the word. This dismantling reveals the immediacy of what already is, an aliveness that cannot be captured or conveyed through language.

So ultimately, the obstacle to unconditional freedom is the belief in the reality of words. Words perpetuate the illusion of separation. Yet their deconstruction exposes the underlying completeness of what has always been.

So what's in between words? What's in between A and B? The labyrinth of words that seem to create this positions and meanings and belief system gets caught up as an idea of my.

Of the self or my idea. So to be able to navigate through that is to read between the lines, to see that there's no opposite when you go in between.

Because when you go in between, there's really no in between. But there is a revelation or what's revealed, that there's never been an opposite in the first place.

So this expression, what's being expressed through, though it's articulated in words, cuts through it like a word assassin, points to the silence beneath them. Even calling it silence is not really apt, but it's for a lack of a better word. It invites a direct seeing of what is beyond the linguistic veil.

In this seeing through, the apparent solidity of concepts such as the reality of self or truth dissolves, leaving only simplicity of what always is timeless, boundless and free. So this is not a teaching, not a lesson, and certainly not an absolutism.

This merely the pointing of something beyond the labyrinth of words, the recognition that the words themselves are the architect of our illusions. So if you're ready to go beyond words, to go into the speechlessness, into that clarity without language, we can go at it, if you like. There you go.

All right.

So what should I say when nothing can be said but for those that wants to listen with a direct openness and willing to relinquish any entrenched notions, any belief systems, any kind of knowing. It's not in what I say. It's like reading between the lines shall tell a narrative of the seeming search for something that cannot be said.

So at the heart of a human experience lies a persistent sense of lack, as though this present directness, this present moment, is never quite enough.

There's always a faint whisper of something that's lacking or missing, a feeling that fulfillment lies elsewhere in the next, perhaps in a place more serene, a state, more joyful, a contentment yet to be discovered.

The character driven by this inherent sense of incompleteness spends its life in pursuit, searching tirelessly for what seems to be perpetually out of reach. It is forever reaching for a future moment or a state that promises to satisfy bliss like a redemption, a completeness, a contentment.

But there's a seeming trying to go from A to B, from here to there. But what's in between that, what's in the gap, what can't be said? It's almost no riddle because it can't really be answered.

Yet this insatiable quest for manifest in many many different kinds of forms, seeking for answers, often spiraling into a frenzy of question that keeps the character really restless, frenetic, neurotic, at times psychotic, and able to fully rest in this immediacy, in this directness. The directness, the now becomes a mere stepping stone, something to endure on the way to a better tomorrow.

The mind, perpetually tethered to projections of the future or the echoes of the past, neglect the richness of this present directness, reducing it to transient means, to an imagined end. There's a chase for the elusive. Promise outshine the present, but true contentment remains elusive. But what if there's no next?

This endless thriving is like a loop of creating a past to maintain a future. So it overlooks what can't be missed. Read between the lines. What is in between here and not here? What is clearly present at this moment?

Not the imaginary past or the perceived future, but something that cannot be said, something that cannot be comprehended. Every character in their own way, is a seeker, driven by the yearning for something more, even in the material world.

Research manifest as the pursuit of maybe happiness, maybe social standing, wealth, maybe more fulfilling relationships. Striving to accumulate possessions and secure a sense of identity. It's always something in the next.

There's a pursuit for security, success, self definition, seeking to make something of ourselves before our demise, to cement our place in the world. But what if that is all imaginary? What if that is just chatter? What are you without language? What is even a you?

When there's no language, there's a clarity that cannot be said, There's a directness that cannot be compromised. But the thought seems to create this navigation of here and there, often trying to figure out what's missing by keep on going to the next.

To fulfill what cannot be fulfilled in the future. Life seems to inevitably disappoint and many turn to non duality, spiritual teachings and response. Here the objective shift, but the seeking remains.

Instead of relationships, instead of material wealth, or maybe contentment, the character seeks awakening or dropping away of the self or the me. Instead of maybe a new car, a new partner, the seeker desires an altered state of consciousness.

Maybe instead of success, there's a longing for enlightenment.

Maybe instead of looking for status, it looks for the dropping away of the self, the yearning for permanent bliss, the transcendence of the ego and the mind. This becomes the New goals.

But whether the search is for gains, like in relationship or wealth, or spiritual enlightenment, it is at its core, the same quest. A movement toward the future that does not exist. A pursuit for the illusory self, me, consciousness, awareness. Put your brand new name in there.

So at the root of all of this seeking lies the construct of the imaginary self, the me, the sense of being a distinct, separate individual. Whether in the quest for spiritual transcendence or to become a billionaire, research centers on this self.

So seeking itself motivated, seeking itself centered, seeking itself preservation. It's trying to preserve a past, and it's trying to secure a future. But what's between self and no self?

When you look closely enough, when you go directly to the question, there's neither a self or neither a no self. So the seeking is irrelevant.

And usually the seeker looks for a teacher, a speaker, to look for a position to look for meaning, to look for guidance, to look for knowledge. Hopefully there's an energetic transmission or transference that can zap the me or the self that it wants to get rid of.

But the problem with that is either the teacher, the speaker, is going to give directions, or no directions, it's still a direction. Either the speaker, the teacher is going to give you a doing or non doing, it's still a doing.

There's always a self, a me, a character that's embedded in it. So what if that is all a trick? Read between the lines. If it's so simple, if it's so immediate, if it's so direct, why can it not be seen?

Because who's looking? It's looking from an imaginary perspective. Then it overlooks what is already present, what is already clear. This directness that cannot be denied.

So this format is trying to go into that gap, into that directness without words, so that it's just not all talk, so it's just more of a direct experience. I'm not going to add for no one or for no one already, but in that immediacy, it's where you and I melt. And there's this softness without a landing.

There is an immediacy without knowing. There's a directness without direction. And again, forget everything that I say. Everything that I say is irrelevant.

Anyone that has ever said anything is irrelevant because what cannot be discussed is already here. So please, go ahead, raise your hand if you would like to. This is not a Q and A meeting. Q and A are completely pointless. Welcome, everyone.

I don't really know what to call this meeting. I don't want to get stuck with the word directness. But I'll use that for now. There's a new. I need to change the name soon.

So if someone can come up with something. The format of this meeting is let's get rid of that Q and A and. And that just leads more into more of a belief system. And.

And just really rather just go directly go, let's get rid of any concepts or labels or any of that and just come into this raw, unfiltered business with reckless abandon. Oh yes, I'll do a. Can you do a poetic. I kind of miss those. Those poetic introductions. Although what's being said here is completely irrelevant.

In the shadowy realms of existence, unthinkable liberation transcends the grasp of personal achievement. To conceive that you, a mere specter of thought and belief can cease liberation is to thread elaborate path of endless futile pursuit.

A thought can't find this because a thought will always lead to more thoughts. A belief cannot undo this because a belief will just lead to more beliefs.

And the self, the me, the character, is merely a thought, a belief system that seems to create this reality. But even reality is just another concept. Who knows what reality is? It's just another word. It's just another thought.

Even the feeling of reality is hijacked by the idea that. That it is reality. The very act of searching only seems to hold meaning with the illusion of complete, the illusion of separation.

When this playing with words, playing with belief system is abandoned, life itself, so called life always, and the most beautiful of wonders just unfolds in this very directness. The character's inability to perceive this stems from the relentless endeavor to become, to succeed, to embody, to virtually be. It's all effort.

Even though effort is effort. What is in between effort and no effort? What is in the middle of doing and not doing?

Because even saying that there's nothing to do, nothing to achieve, nothing to know, it's still a doing, it's still a suggestion of you doing nothing or not you. It's. It's just all a mess. It's just going back and forth. The pointless Q and A that just seems to answer to.

To try to kind of like almost perceive that there is an answer. So a thought maintaining a thought just creates more thought. When you look at the abyss long enough, it stares back at you and there's a blackout.

The absence of knowing, the in between directness. In this abyss, there is a seeming revelation. All striving disintegrates. The body relaxes, the imagined mind ceases in that realization.

That there's only what cannot be said, what cannot be known. When the idea of the self, or even the notion of no self vanishes, it is not a desolate void stripped of any joy or any kind of blissfulness.

Rather, this void steams with life, with aliveness. Or it could be just a blank page waiting for stories to appear in and out. In this isness, in this raw essence, the void is vibrantly alive.

The abyss is void of fear, or simply empty nothingness, emptiness, although they're just words, become magnificent appearances. The going back of the mind trying to figure out this and that simply vanishes. It becomes irrelevant.

Thoughts becomes whispers, whispers about the past, whispers about the future. This fragile beauty transcends words. It is a silent, melancholic, tender romance with intimacy.

This wildness, this wildness, this unknowingness, this spectral love, tenderness, innocence cannot really confine, be confined by words. Yet in between words and concept, there it is again, the abyss, the unspeakable, the unthinkable.

So in this exploration, in this wild directness, I encourage characters to speak up, you know what I'm saying, and just go really directly into it. Let's let go for all stories about, you know, what is this and what is that? Because answers are completely irrelevant. Q&As are pointless.

It just positions that someone here knows and someone there doesn't. It just becomes hierarchy again. It becomes a masturbation of words. But you will never get off. Sorry, that's what it seems.

A flinging of words back and forth. What is that? It's a moot point. There's nothing even to argue about. I don't have any position, I don't have any knowledge.

There's some kerfuffle around social media of what I'm trying to do. It's just always been the same.

This character is trying to express this as clearly as possible without the confines of being a teacher, someone that knows. So, yeah, so let's get to it. If anyone wants to ask a question or go. Actually, no. No more asking questions. It's over. Go to a different meeting.

If all you have is questions, let's go directly. It's old school. It's over. So if you want to go directly, please go ahead. Hello, everyone. Thank you so much for coming. So welcome to.

For people that are brand new to this meeting, it's. It's more of a. It's more like a one on one rather than a Q A.

Let's change the format a little bit, right, and just come into the directness Should I do an introduction, maybe? Yeah, it's not necessary, but I'll. I'll do it anyway. Yes, please. Okay. All right.

So after all the empire supports crumble, all of the sand castles of beliefs is leveled by the waves of the infinite isness, the thrones of authoritarian speaking is exposed for its irrelevance.

All the questions and answers are revealed as nothing but a play of words and completely pointless when all the sacred cows are revealed as nothing but just false idolatry.

And when all the teachers, sages, speakers, including the speaker who maintained beliefs, ideas, positions, bows down to admit that no one knows anything, no one knows what they're talking about, since talk is cheap, but what is priceless cannot be said. So all of these musings are relevant, all of these words are hollow and empty.

Yet there is this piece that everyone attempts to say, but has never been captured in words, since words will always create a duplicity of the undivided. So in the gap of wild imaginings and logical reasoning, there is an unexpected revelation, so subtle yet so profound.

It's like an elegant silence that is both quiet and loud. In the gap of truisms and falsehoods, there is something that cannot be made up.

In the gap between the unquestionable beliefs and the obvious doubts lies the ineffable. The boundaries that seekers perceive are nothing more than constructs of the mind. The opposites are nothing but appearances.

And even the mind is a construction, illusion that fade away when examined closely. So in between opposites, there's something that is. It's an infinite question mark, something that cannot be made up.

And between the movement and stillness, there's something that is action and inaction lose their meaning. There's a boundless space where distinctions between movement and stillness just disappear.

At the core of all of this motion lies a deep stillness, the comings and goings, the opposites like an eternal calm that quietly supports this constant flow that cannot be spoken. This calm is not the absence of sound or movement. It's like a presence without a source, a stillness that feels every movement.

It's like a backdrop that's always there where life's dance, play, poetry takes place, the canvas where disappearance paints its masterpiece. But there's no painter. It's like a dance without a choreographer, no predetermined steps, no fixed endpoints.

Every moment appears spontaneously, a unique and unrepeatable expression of this question mark. In this dance. Let's go in between.

For all of meanings and thinking dissolves in this in betweenness, where the great works of art and play and all music seemingly appears from in this gap where all of the quietness and the chaos seems to emanate from.

So in this next hour and a half or two hours, I invite you to that gap, into that stillness, into that in between questions and answers about what this is and what this is not, just leads more into questions and answers. It's just a never ending loop. So in between that loop, there is this. I can't say it, or all questions and answers fall apart.

I can't even say truth because truth is just another position. But there's something that is unthinkable, unknowable, that seems to bring this contentment, this peace, this joy.

Even if there's chaos, even if there's anger, there's this peace. So if you would like to. Ooh. Seeking must stop. Seeking has to end. Though it cannot be stopped by thoughts, practices, knowledge or concepts.

It has to stop. It's madness. So engaging in practice or non practice is inevitable. Inevitable. Can't pronounce that word.

One is compelled to pursue it because it promises an end, like an enlightenment or dropping away of the self, of the me, finding a true nature. Insert ideas here.

Even if one abandons one form of practice, it induces an internal struggle leading to the adoption of another form, such as listening to speakers, ideas like aware of being aware, nothing, being everything. Or adopting a new belief system like this is it.

Or continually saying it's just this, it's just this, it's just this, it's just this, it's already the case, this or no, this is what is already. The terminology may vary, but the essence remains unchanged. At some point, it becomes necessary to see that this pursuit is not a solution.

Otherwise one will persist in seeking the speaker's guidance or words or teachers, hoping the next session will bring clarity, hoping there will be an understanding, hoping there will be an energetic shift of what's being expressed, hoping that one day I will get what is being expressed over and over again.

Then it becomes a practice, that it becomes something that is done over and over again, hoping that it will get it one day, hoping that the next meeting will create some clarity, hoping that it will get zapped, hoping that there's an understanding that will occur.

However, any transformative shift must occur in the directness, in this directness, not in the next, not in a new meeting, not in my upcoming two day online event. It's this moment without a second.

However, the challenge lies in the fact that the more beliefs one holds, the harder it becomes to Break free as its new belief adds to the existing belief system.

There is a tendency to integrate the teachings or communications or message of new speakers or teachers into the existing framework, therefore reinforcing more beliefs. The seeker becomes a hoarder of belief system. It becomes addicted to the idea of the next.

It becomes addicted to the idea of the me, the self that needs to shift, drop, fall away, realize its true nature. This structure aims to preserve the belief of a self, it's self reinforcement.

While the new speaker, new teacher, may seek to dismantle the accumulated nature of beliefs, not to uphold it. Each breakthrough by a speaker gets assimilated into more belief system, making genuine revolution or breakthrough increasingly difficult.

Because it is caught up in ideas now of what should happen. It has a new belief system that there's no me or there is a self.

Insert anything that you could possibly think about, it's just really swimming in thoughts, it's swimming in ideas and then drowning in them, hoping that one day he will be saved by a word, by an idea, by a concept, by communication, by a message, always waiting for the next. Even the most radical ideas, to an apparent someone who has transcended that traditional belief system, are swiftly absorbed into new beliefs.

The act of listening transforms revolutionary ideas into mere knowledge, thereby reinforcing that old belief system. You will hear something new, like free falling. You will hear something new like directness, or what is this? Or as it is.

The listening process itself fortifies tradition beliefs. It reinforces the thoughts.

Therefore, the speaker, the teacher, emphasizes that their words are no different than the birds chirping, the dog's barking. By the time these words are internalized or understood, there's a new need for another breakthrough. Say something new, say something radical.

The aim is not to create followers, but to inspire something that is authentic, this direct authenticity, liberating them from the past confines of ideas and traditions. If you really look at it, everything is just repackaged, renamed, retooled. But it's the same thing over and over and over again. It's just thoughts.

Maintaining thoughts to remain a reality that is just a thought, following others perpetuates this potential of authenticity, of clarity, without words.

Not a secondhand knowledge, not something that's passed on, not something that's remembered or memorized, or something that's repeated over and over again because it becomes a mantra, it becomes a dogma, becomes jargon. There's this extraordinariness about the ordinariness of simplicity, of expressing simply what is.

What seems to happen is when there is a Speaker, a teacher that that proclaims something, it becomes an authority figure, it becomes the new Buddha, the new Ramana, the new Tony, beloved figures. But it becomes repetitious.

And the seeming individual gets caught up in a belief system, hoping that one day they'll have the same realization as the Buddha, as Tony, as whoever. But what's being expressed here is what is in between belief and no belief. What is in between thoughts or no thoughts.

What is something that cannot be talked about? Is it a belief system? Is it a concept, Is it an understanding? Is it a proclamation? Is it something that is knowable? Has someone cracked the mystery?

Does someone know the unknowable? No fault of the teacher, the speaker that speaks about this. Just a second, some Coke Zero.

Because there's an admission that what's being expressed is incomprehensible, it's unknowable, it is indescribable.

But what seems to be gotten from these meetings are statements that becomes pillars of understandings, belief systems that creates this conceptual idea that if one day I get the meaning of everything, nothing being everything, or if I become aware of awareness, then there's going to be a boom. But the boom is not in the next, it's not in the next meeting, it's not in the next video, it's not in the next event.

It's in this directness that can't be expressed, that can't be thought about, that can't be known. There's this radiant emptiness here that is everly present.

But even when that is co opted as a belief, then the apparent individual believes now that there's this empty radiance and it becomes an idea, it becomes a concept, it becomes an understanding, or it becomes a confusion that one day I will get what he's saying about this empty radiance or whatever word that is said. So it's not in the words, it's not in the statements, it's not something that will be said.

And I noticed that people watch videos over and over and over again to get something that cannot be gotten to understand something that cannot be understood. And then sometimes it, it really believes what's being said. Like it's hopeless and it goes into depression, or it becomes an authority.

Saying that there's no me becomes a radical non duality police. There's a me there, it becomes a new witch hunt.

But what's being expressed here in the immediacy, in the clarity is not in a belief system of another. It's not the understanding, it's not the subjective truth. Of someone that is an authority figure.

It's the turning of the tables, is the wrecking of all of the, any, any kind of pedestals, overturning any authority figures, because that seems to be the obstacle that seems to be the culprit. When someone is suggesting something, it becomes a new dogma if it's repeated over and over and over and over again.

And in this age of the Internet where everybody can have a glimpse and repeat the same things over and over again, where's the authenticity?

If every tree is different, every character is different in this illusion, of course, then isn't the apparent breakthrough going to be different as well? And that's just a story, of course. Don't believe anything that I say.

It's just a suggestion that once a belief becomes a belief and then it goes into the file of belief system and it misses the point that what already is is not a comprehension. It's just. I can't even say this anymore. I'm sick of saying this as well. It's the same thing over and over again.

And there's going to be so many people is going to be saying this, this, this, this, this, enough. And it just becomes a new religion, the religion of this. So you wanted the rebellious side. It just fortifies, it just upholds a new belief system.

But again, it's just all repack. It's all. There's nothing really new.

It becomes, rather than having kind of like a rare and something that's revolutionary, it becomes stale and stagnant because it becomes the new mantra. When I was seeking, I kept saying from when I was in the traditional advaita, omnama shivaya, onu maheshivaya.

And then it became there's no me, there's no me, there's no me. But what it does is it reinforces a belief system based on an idea. So what's between me or no me? What's between belief or no belief?

What can't be said is what's being expressed here. What cannot be said in words is what's being. What's really clear here. Not my ideas, not anyone's ideas.

So in this departure of trying to figure out what's being said, there's nothing that's needed to be known because knowing will just reinforce that there's a knower. There's nothing that needs to be sought because seeking just reinforces the seeker. So let's go a little bit into, into this, into this isness.

I'm running out of words because it really can't be said and repeating something over and over and over again ad infinitum, ad nauseam is nauseating. And then believing that there's nothing to get, there's nothing to know is also frustrating.

And the ultimate belief that there's no one here becomes of a lot of people because it becomes this, this. Oh, there's. It just becomes this idiocracy. Let's just say it. So what's being expressed here?

Again, this is with love, with unconditionalness, that whatever that's being said, whatever that's being thought, whatever that's being trying to figure out, there is something that is so direct that in the absence of thoughts, although it doesn't matter if thoughts are no thoughts, because thoughts are just thoughts.

In the absence of duality, polarities, in the absence of this or not this, in the absence of me or no me, in the absence of absence, there is a piece that's so direct that will, it will slap you in your face of all of the concepts, all of the ideas, all of the knowledge, all of the prescription, all of the description, because it's not even describable. So why could it be prescriptive or descriptive? It's just creating this madness. I was talking to someone and I said, shh, shh, and then that's it.

If you have any questions, please go ahead. Are you not perpetuating what you're talking about? Yes, I am actually, but I'm admitting it.

There is a full on admission here that what's being said perpetuates the seeking. There is a full on admission that there's nothing that's. I have no idea what I'm talking about. Thank you.

Oh, I'll open up the chat so that more people can, can chat, pointing to the irrelevance of what's being said here. And yes, I did not see that. I was just looking directly at the lens.

So in this wild directness where all that I've ever said is completely nonsense, because it does not make sense to talk about something that can't be talked about because it does not have an opposite.

There's really no audience here, despite the appearance of a speaker and an audience seemingly participating or will be participating in a discussion that really leads to nothing, that will really lead to not a realization, not even an aha moment, because this talk is not really for the mind, for mind does not exist. It bypasses the ego because it does not even see an ego. It destroys the idea of individuality because it's just another idea.

It does not cling on to any kind of knowing or understanding. So in this wild directness, there is something that is always here.

And there's something that always here, although it's unimaginable, is often imagined as something that appears in the next. That often creates this idea that there's something to be gotten here. But there is a. A complete admission here that no one knows about this.

Everyone's just talking in circles. Everyone's just talking about a destination. But there's not even an everyone.

It's like a sobriety of trying to get something that is always intoxicating. And this meeting defeats the purpose of the meeting, of trying to expose what already is.

Because for the listener, there's always going to be this idea that what is he talking about? What is he trying to get to? What. What is it that he's trying to point to, but he can't be pointed out?

So forgive the speakers for trying to attempt over and over and over again, or the teachers trying to teach something that cannot be taught. But there's a direct admission here that the speaker knows nothing. It does not contain any special knowledge or any kind of any aha Moments.

But it's just basically taking away all the obstacles that create this illusion that there's something to know.

It's just eradicating any kind of understanding or knowledge or something that's been learned as something that is in contradiction to what's being said here. Because what's being said here has already been spoken. Not by me, not by anyone, but it's already here.

If you have any questions, please go ahead and. Sorry, I did not. I did not record. Start again, please. I can't. I don't know what. What actually said. Thank you, though.

If you have any questions, please go. So what's being expressed is.

In the discussions of non duality, individuals often refer to an experience of recognition or a resonance that arises when one encounters words emanating from a profound clarity. This resonance transcends the boundaries of the intellectual mind, existing beyond recognition and comprehension.

It strikes at the core of the communication that is being conveyed, offering the potential for something ineffable, unthinkable, impossible, unfathomable to emerge.

The essence of such communication is to highlight an illumination that defies understanding, a recognition that lies beyond thought, an opening into an extraordinary, yet fundamentally ordinary appearance that the mind cannot fully grasp. However, when non duality becomes an understanding, it quickly becomes into a belief system.

It quickly becomes an understanding that someone can rock. The issue with that is that it becomes this repetitious Knowing of something that cannot be known.

When addressing the concept of non duality, the use of metaphors, paradoxes becomes necessary as these linguistic tools attempt to capture an isness using words that inherently fragments and divides. It is akin to trying to catch water with a fishing net or trying to catch air with a butterfly net. An endeavor that is doomed to failure.

Consequently, talks on non duality are replete with contradictions and paradoxes, leading the intellect, which strives for comprehension, to confusion or disorientation. The mind, the me, the character.

The individual's desire to understand stems from a need to possess and control a role that it has played over and over and over again. And it keeps on evolving and evolving and evolving.

Seemingly, of course, however, this direct invitation is to forego intellectual understanding and instead remain open to the possibility of illumination. See the limitations of the words, the falsity, the. The. The incoherence of thoughts and the fractured belief system.

So the concept presented in this talk are designed to challenge every preconceived notion about non duality. Lately, non duality has just become a belief system. It has become an excuse. It has become almost kind of like a cognitive dissonance.

Sometimes it's gaslighty, sometimes because it becomes an understanding or it becomes a belief system stemming from an authority figure. So this challenge may be perceived as a threat to oneself.

What's being expressed here in the directness, in the immediacy of things and establish truths. Nonetheless, this challenge may be perceived as an ending to seeking, as an illumination that nothing is needed but everything is allowed.

It is crucial to recognize that the speaker, this mouthpiece and the listener are fundamentally the same. There's no one that knows better.

Here, in full transparency, no one knows what is being talked about, but there's always a feeling that the speaker knows something more. That's a facade, that's a construction. There is a unity in this exploration of what cannot be talked about.

Not a fracture of someone being a no me or me or a speaker that's enlightened or not. Because they are just opposites, they are just illusions. If any part of this talk appears to be harsh or uncaring, it is not the intention.

The aim is not to shock or upset anyone, but to share the potential for clarity, for directness.

Challenging any belief system, obscuring any kind of potential authority figure being completely candid about what is perceived as non duality, as an understanding, as a belief system, a contradiction, a knowing a group think. In this unfolding, there's this openness, there's this clarity. Without any words in the directness, there's not this or that.

In this openness, there's neither a true or false, better or worse speaker, listener. In the middle of that, there's something that can't be talked about in between me or no me. There's this clarity in the midst of truth and false.

There's something that is unthinkable and there's an attempt here to talk as clear as possible, to be as authentic as possible, to be able to express something that cannot be expressed with utmost sincerity in hopes even in this story of seeking, that there's an ending to it, not a maintenance of it, not a pacifying of it.

So this invitation, if you would like to speak and, and really kind of like just not going to concepts, not going to what, any pass down knowledge, not going to rhetoric, not going to some kind of jargon, not coming to some previous belief system, any hand me down knowledge, but just coming to the directness where all of these words are really not necessary. Understanding is not even needed. There is this clarity that's not mine or not yours or not.

Anyone's in between an individual and a no individual in between self or no self. It does not need any explanation. It's a quick instant revelation. It hits right away. Seemingly everyone's talking about a concept.

Even if they say it's not a concept, it's still a concept. There's nothing worse or you know, this is not less or more or anything.

There's just in the observation that everyone's talking about awareness from one side and one side is talking about nothing or there's no me or any, any talk that that is being talked about. Now there's, there's this jargon that appears that seems very restrictive, that seems very Confucius thing and it becomes almost like the standard.

So this is breaking all of that, this is breaking all kind of understanding, any kind of box.

And lately with this directness there's been more characters that are seemingly get out of 10, 20, 30 years of seeking with clarity, with astonishment of how simple really it is. And this clarity that cannot be said is going to be attempted in this next hour, two hours of meeting.

So I recommend if someone wants to get right dive into it, I'll sharp my machete. So if you would like to dive into it, please go ahead. Any takers? Yeah, I'm down. Oh, go ahead, go ahead. Oh, and, and I have Maria next.

Sorry, go ahead. Yeah, make sure no one's locked out. Okay. Welcome back everyone. Thank you so much. This is the third and final meeting of the day. Hooray.

So this suggestion, in this directness, in this isness, in this without a second, in the silent expanse of this apparent existence, disappearance, there is no witness, there is no observer to validate its presence. For what needs validation when being simply already is, it already is. It does not need a two or witness or an observer.

If perchance the act of witnessing ceased, would the essence of disappearance dissolved into oblivion? If but for a fleeting moment, awareness abandoned its post, would reality, this isness, this emptiness, would crumble beneath its absence?

Or would the tapestry of this apparent appearance remain unchanged, unfaced by the web of illusion, unmoved by the eb and flow of apparent awareness or consciousness? The notion of witnessing is a mere construct of the mind. It fades into the shadows of illusion. Consider the act of running. I was running earlier.

Does the road cease to unfold if the mind momentarily forgets its role as the runner? Does the journey unravel without the vigilant eye of perception? No.

What is persists unchanged, unyielding in its continuity, indifferent to the whims of the observation. So what is this directness, this. This radical? Just this, just this, without a second, just this. It's a symphony of existence.

It's playing out in a theater of isness. Whether it in a quiet contemplation of a chair.

You know, listening to this, looking at this meeting, the absorption of words on a page when you're reading a book, getting into the story, the resonance of music in the ears, or savoring every morsel of the food and making yum sounds. Or even the chaos of the thoughts in the mind. Each moment is just an echo of what can never be known. There's nothing more, nothing less.

Simply the ever unfolding present aliveness, pregnant with the fullness of nothing, being everything. Yet that elusive sense of self is sincere. It. It's. It's captured in the web of the illusion.

It yearns for complexity amids the simplicity of this apparent appearance. It searches for the meaning where there's no meaning. Grasping at the shadows of the past, projections of the future.

But in the innocence of a childhood there existed a purity of apparent experience. It's unencumbered by the burdens of consequence or the shackles of time, or what are people going to say as children?

Every sensation was immediate, like boom. Every emotion is raw and unfiltered. There was no concern for tomorrow, no lamentation for yesterday.

Only the boundlessness, expanse of the present moment, ripe with any kind like possibility and brimming with this apparent life. And so perhaps, maybe, perhaps the simplicity is not a journey. It's just seeing what is. Just seeing what is without you.

Because there's no you to see. This where the essence of disappearing existence is very immediate, felt in every breath, easy to cry, easy to belly laugh, snapping the.

The knee for no reason at all. And the beauty of just being, not a being like, you know, just being, is found in the simplicity of this immediateness.

In this immediateness, there's a seeming appearance of a reaction, but there's no cause and effect. There's an appearance of an interaction, but there's no other. There's an appearance of another, but there's no witness to it.

It's just really immediate. It's without a second, it's without a clue.

So this coming and going and happening and happening, towing and froing, is just the isthmus that seemingly never moves in movement, in dance, in cyclical appearances. This and not this opposite seems to appear, but without an opposite. If you see a child, if you take away the candy, you will cry.

If you give a candy, you will laugh. It's so immediate. It does not try to complex, make something really simple, so complex.

Like, for example, if the candy is taken away, then the child is not going to think that there must be something that is missing in this life. The reason that the universe is not giving me the candy, there must be something that I need to seek to get that candy back.

It's just simply the disappearance of a candy or when the, the child receives a candy. It's like it just takes, does not try to avoid, you know, the simplicity of it or complicated with trying to understand what is happening.

Is this candy, is it real? Is it sugar free? Is it gluten free? Is it vegan? What's this?

So what's being expressed here is that what this is does not need any validation, does not need any observation, does not need any witnessing, does not need any contemplation. And there's nothing wrong or right about contemplation, but it's not really necessary, does not even need inquiry, although inquiry might happen.

And that's completely all right. It does not need you. It does not need a you, because a you does not really exist. It's actually the observer, the witness, but it's an illusion.

Again, this is not to put down anything that's being thought out there.

It's just, it's just, it's just a wild, you know, suggestion that maybe trying to figure this out is still coming from that Position of a witness trying to figure out something that it's witnessing. When the one that's trying to figure out the witness, the observer, the you, the mind is actually not there.

It doesn't exist outside of a thought, outside of a feeling, outside of ideas, outside of sensation, outside of labels, outside of memory, outside of anything that has anything to do with you. It doesn't exist. Simply it does not exist. It can be imagined, it can be thought about it, it can be, it can be studied.

But simply those are just wild imaginings of something that does not require an imagination, something that does not require comprehension. Again, simply something that does not require you. And it doesn't matter if there's a felt sense of you.

It does not matter if there's a felt sense of separation. But there is no witness to it, there's no observer to it.

And it's quite, quite devastating for someone that's practices and it's unacceptable for someone that has been trying, trying to be aware of what's happening. So to conclude this, this meeting, everything fades, everything goes, everything dissol. But nothing really happens.

Nothing is really observed, nothing is really known. There's no witnessing this, there's no figuring it out. There's no toddler non duality meetings. I hope not.

Imagine, imagine little kids trying to figure out what is. And I talk about my little nephew.

That's why for, you know, for some character that's young and sees this as it is, it makes total sense that it does not make sense.

But when an apparent character that has gone through the whole cycle of seeking awareness, consciousness, anything, anything, you know, there's nothing wrong or right about that, this becomes something that is unacceptable.

It becomes something that is quite challenging because it obscures, I mean it demolishes the belief system that there is something that is being missed. So in the absence of consciousness, awareness or A2 or witness and everything, it's this nothing outside of this, just this.

If you have any questions, please go ahead. And it's a relief, actually. It's quite a relief. Go ahead. Sorry.

Speaker B: 01:23:48

Yeah, and, and so hummingbirds have kind of been this like symbol for me. And after I had that journey, like this hummingbird came and hovered right by the window and I ended up having a really important conversation.

And another time a hummingbird was like pointing right at me.

I'm talking to this friend and I'm like saying this stuff about mindset and like my time works for me and my money works for me and blah, blah, blah, whatever, just stuff, right?

And, and this hummingbird Comes and is like this far from me outside and is like pointing right at me, you know, And I'm like, on one level this is just story, but like, oh yeah, I get to be whatever character I want in this virtual reality. And like I get to enjoy this because that's what I want to do. Like I get to have fun with these things. That's the game I want to play.

So I get to play it. Like there's. Yeah, I don't know. Anyway, so I was coming up for.

Speaker A: 01:24:52

Me on this, like, oh, thank you for sharing. That's cool.

Speaker B: 01:24:56

Yeah, so fun stuff, like still, still get to play the character. Like that's something that comes up for me with this like me know me, like whatever. And I'm like, I came like I came here to have fun game, so.

But I get to play it with the new.

Speaker A: 01:25:22

Cool. Thank you so much. Yeah, thank you. Thank you for sharing Magic. Thank you so much everyone for coming. We'll share more Magic in a moment.

I'll just do an introduction and, and when we can go into more discussion, I'll. I'll riff off on that. I guess.

When the sense of self, the apparent me, the character, the individual dissipates even momentarily, it heralds kind of like a profound shift in directness where the ego, mind, self projection onto reality, see cease. So the creation of reality just ceases. This ephemeral appearance dissolves the perceptual filter, granting an immediate and mediated directness.

In such moments, reality is not merely perceived, but what is reality? It transcends cognition and relational dynamics.

This appearance of isness without a being or being lessness, that's the new word, being lessness, characterized by openness and ease. Kind of like what Saeed was saying. It epitomizes balance and in betweenness, that's another new one. The concept of in between.

It's just under concept where no me or me can land on. Where there is just no place for any kind of belief or non belief ideas or non ideas. When the duality just seems to collapse.

There's an equilibrium between the directness and the individual's authentic story, humanity, whatever you might want to call it. This is quite a departure to the belief system that there's no one or more into simply not to simplicity.

The radical idea of there is no one has now become very conservative and orthodox. An absolute perspective, just like how awareness, being aware has become stale. This speaker, this one speaking, wants to kick all of that.

And coming to the in between where no one has gone before. What's in between a self and no self. What's between time and timeless, what's between being and non being.

Since the me the character tries to adapt to whatever this speaker is saying and somewhat creates this idea that there's something wrong with what is directly seemingly appearing. So the human quest often revolves around ameliorating or you know what the definition of that is.

Making something better, making something bad better of our imperfect humanity. This. This isness, this directness.

While self improvement is a natural endeavor driven by the intrinsic tendency of nature to refine itself, it is imperative to see also that this beinglessness is inherently flawless already. There's another, an alternative to that.

That there's no one to improve, since there's no one, is also a thinly disguised set of improvement by attaining a nomi status. So it just goes to the opposite. Again, the challenge lies in harmonizing this perfection with the apparent human limitations.

So there are moments of non projection offer a directness, an unadulterated vision of what is already. These moments, for example, enable the character to confront unfinished emotional business or physical pain.

Kind of like what Daniel was saying, with a profound quality of attention, underscoring the significance of compassion and forgiveness. And again, you know what? Right away when you say that in radical, it's always kind of like there's no uncompassion, there's no unforgiveness.

So if anger arises, even triggers hell, have a tantrum, there's a directness to see that that is also it in a complete way of seeing that not a belief system, that there is no one. Not a. No belief system, but just directly. Just really, really directly. No concepts, no non concepts, no teaching, no whatever, just really directly.

So embracing the perceived brokenness with compassion is also what is. As it guards against the descent into the despair or hopelessness. There's a tendency to believe that it's hopeless. Hopeless, Hopeless.

Being lessness transcends that dichotomy of hope and hopelessness because it becomes another belief system.

The reason that I'm speaking out a lot more lately about this is because I've been encountering a lot of people that are depressed because of their belief system that it's hopeless. I have gotten several calls, two in particular, that really kind of like bothered this character.

One person said that they were suicidal and they talked, called one of the speakers and the speaker said that it's just what's happening.

So what's being expressed here is that there's an equanimity, there's this balance because of belief that there's no one here, although it's undeniable and it will always be said that way, that there is simply no one. But that becomes a belief system. If it's really unknowable, it's not knowable if there's someone or no one.

There's an emptiness, a beinglessness, not a position, not an idea, not a belief system. That there's simply no one. Because that becomes the new religion, that becomes the new idea, that becomes the new standard. But that's stale.

A lot of people are getting depressed from it, a lot of people are suffering from it, from this new belief system that it's hopeless, that there's no one. And there's a rejection of compassion, of humility, because that means that there must be a me if there's humility or compassion.

But where's the humanness?

And of course, people that have been listening for quite a while just adapts into that jargon, that mentality, that belief system, without seeing its contradiction, without seeing that it's just another belief system. Because it's quick to add there's no one for no one. Then it creates this almost like a bypassing.

So what's being expressed here is the clarity without the opposites. If you have not seen it yet, one opposite will talk about awareness and the opposite will talk about no one. It's just two belief systems.

What's being expressed here is not a belief or a non belief. It's the clarity, it's directness. I often wonder why people. People keep on seeking for 10, 20 years in awareness and also in radical.

Because they're stuck on a belief system. There's an authority figure and I've turned away a lot of people that listening to me because of this directness, this wildness.

But somehow there seems to be a lot of people that are seemingly realizing that there are simply no opposites. And the belief in an opposite is just a structure that will keep the seeking alive, that. That neurosis, so to speak.

And then there's new belief system like there's a contracted energy and it's talked over and over again. If there's no me, why talk about the me all the time? The same thing with awareness. Why does it have to be aware to be aware? That's duality.

And one beliefs in everything, one believes in nothing. But both their belief system, what's in belief and no belief. There's beinglessness or directness, or whatever word you might want to come up.

There's a flow of aliveness fostered by directness. That makes anything authentic.

Not because of someone's idea, not because someone that's passed on an idea, not someone's realization, because that's someone's realization. That's still a character saying that this is what the realization is. The directness sees everything as it.

Not because of some jargon or some idea or whatever.

It's just beyond the ideas, beyond the dichotomies, beyond the polarities, and in between there is this equanimity, there's this flow, there's this eastness, there's this wow, there's compassion, there's humility. It's not something. Because we got used to negating everything. There's no free will, you know, that becomes the new belief system.

There's no compassion, that becomes another thing. So it becomes this cookie cutter mentality like a belief system, almost like a cult, like thinking the same thing as awareness and everything.

It's all belief systems. And then we become stale. You know what? There's gratitude for both, to be honest with you. There's extreme gratitude.

But when there is hearing of people suffering from it, then there's always going to be this directness or there's going to be this bluntness of what seems to appear. There's going to be respect for all the speakers and teachers.

But isn't it time in this timelessness to go directly, rather than siding with the position, siding with an idea, or going under a pyramid scheme of, of a belief system? Because when someone feels suicidal, for example, whereas the human isn't saying that, hey, if you need help, you can talk to me.

What I usually do is I said, if you, I will call you. And I said, if you are feeling like you're harming right now, please call the hospital. I will talk to you every day, you know what I'm saying?

Every day. And because there is just this passing on of ideas, then the next speaker wants to be more radical than the next.

So it becomes colder and colder and colder, more detached to what this is. And it becomes something that is held upon as a belief system.

There's going to be police, there's going to be believers that's going to say, well, there's no one to do compassion and everything. But that's just another belief system.

The, the obviousness, the simplicity of words, thoughts, beliefs becomes this, this thrown away because there's a belief now that it's a contracted energy. So what's being expressed here is the authenticity, the directness of what is.

If there are difficulties like pain, if there's difficulties like depression, Suffering, then it's not going to throw that away as just something happening, because that just becomes another belief system. It just becomes another bypassing. And so it's time to let go of any kind of jargon or parroting or dogmatic belief system.

And they come into laughter and sadness and whatever seems to appear as not something that is wrong or right, because both positions are just trying to create a wrong or rightness and everything. So what's being expressed here is just. It's in between hope and hopelessness. Right here, between know me and me, right here.

Whatever this is, I can't even call it anything. And in that flow, everything flows. Nothing is denied, everything is allowed. Words are always going to be contradictory, so I hold on to them.

Language has always create a next, a proposition, a suggestion. Why not go beyond the language? Go into this direct business that no one can talk about. There's a piece that does not have any, any, any.

Next, there's a liberation that's so stunning that it can't be said in words. It can't be thought, it can't be even spoken of. Teaching, no teaching, same thing. Concept, no concept, still a concept.

Belief, no belief, still a belief. Practice, no practice, still a practice. Hopefully there's an awakeness happening to what's being said here.

I'm not here to pass on new belief systems. This speaker is here to.

To turn tables, to defy authorities, to be wild, to be free from any kind of conceptual information that's being passed on as whatever this is. And what's being expressed here is this boundlessness that's also allowed. There's nothing wrong or right with it.

I mean, the speakers and the teachers don't mean it to be that way. But because it's been repeated so many times, it's become a broken record, it's skipping, it's stale, and no wonder.

There's people that are stuck in it over and over again. Although there's no purpose. The purpose of the speaker is to get you out of here, not to keep followers.

I've already turned off a lot of people in the other communities because there's just a threat here to the belief system. But there's an earnestness here to get you out of the seeking, although there's no. You see, that's the languaging again, right?

Because I would not want anyone to go through what I went through in the suffering of seeking, the depression, the suicidal tendencies.

There is this radiance here that does not require you to believe me or anyone at all, does not Require any, doesn't have any obstacles, doesn't have any kind of knowledge. It does not kind of have any kind of hierarchies.

There's no pedestals here, there's just a friend here really trying to say, isn't it time in a timelessness to go really direct and key and, and, and instead of maintaining a belief system of either awareness of either nothing or whatever seems to come up and then read between the lines of what's being here said here and not said. If you would like to have a talk, please go ahead.

So the suggestion is that upon encountering the concept that the individual human experience may be an illusion or a mere game, or that your reality is based on a thought, the individual, the seeker, the mind often experiences a state of disarray, like a disorientation. When the illusory individual reality is challenged, it goes into a defense mechanism.

This reaction is due to the apparent mind perceiving a threat to its own existence, prompting it to employ various strategies to defense, defend against this perceived intrusion. It comes up with stories, it comes up with excuses, it comes up with a whole bunch of belief systems.

It comes up with an experience, it comes up with a glimpse, it comes up with this will never happen to me. It's just a whole bunch of defense mechanisms because there is this a shake up, a breakdown, a the gig is up kind of thing.

When there is this presentation, this suggestion that the mind, the thought, the me, the individual, has no reality, so it comes up with its own reality, creating a whole bunch of mechanisms.

So one primary mechanism that the apparent character, the me, the mind itself, whatever you might want to call it, the ego, it basically tries to go into a compulsion to understand. To understand is like a mind trick to become its own authority figure, which reflects the process of submitting to the mind's dominion.

Basically by granting the apparent mind authority, the apparent individual experience, a reality as shaped by this consent, by understanding, it prolongs the rude awakening that it does not exist, that it does not have any relevance. Once the character thinks it understands, then it makes understanding a belief system. Then it creates this identity as an eternal seeker.

If it's not enough for the understanding of their own belief system, trying to understand it, I get it, I get it, I get it. And then it also adheres to a secondhand pass me down knowledge, and it repeats what the speaker or the teacher is saying as an understanding.

I get it, I get it, I get it. But that's just another mechanism, another trick, so to speak, to create this division to Create this hallucination. It's a defense mechanism.

Even when there's a prevalent inquiry, you know, like that famous who am I all? The alternative, basically, which is a belief that there's no me is frequently addressed to the apparent mind.

So when task with answering this profound question or adhering to a new belief system, the apparent mind embarks on a seemingly interminable and arduous quest. No linguistic construct can satiate the mind's relentless pursuit of understanding, of getting it.

They will say that I get it, but I want to understand.

Conversely, when control is relinquished to the essence of this infiniteness, whatever you might want to call it, the apparent journey towards peace unfolds with greater ease and enjoyment. But the problem is no one wants to give control.

Control is the function of the character to create this idea that they are in control of whatever's happening. Therefore they have to understand what awakening, dropping away is to be able to get there.

Therefore, creating a construct of a next, or creating a construct of the past, I get it. But it's not about the past or the future. This directness has no ideas.

So the thought, the mind, the character, the ego, whatever you might want to call it, keeps on coming up with a whole bunch of excuses. Even when there's a temporary glimpse, when it sees this isness, this directness, then it creates another idea, like will I be able to keep this?

Or when there's clarity for quite a while, maybe a couple of days, it will announce that it finally got announces that it, it's over. It's, it's, it's, it is done.

But what usually happens is if you've ever been have had that apparent realization, is that the apparent mind kicks back with an understanding of what's happening. Therefore including again the illusion of separation. Therefore creating the illusion that it has finished a journey.

But nothing ever moves, nothing really ever changes. There's going to be fluctuations of the apparent mind coming and going. When there is a clarity, there is an absence of that coming and going.

And there's an easiness, a directness, a wowness. But it's not about figuring it out. It's actually when the apparent mind or character, self, me, whatever, gets tripped up.

When it glimpses that it does not exist. When it glimpses that everything is just running on its own.

When it sees clearly that what's happening has nothing to do with mind, ego, thoughts, they're completely irrelevant. Some character might see some clarity or some release of any belief systems. Then there is this aliveness. Or sometimes it's just Very ordinary.

Seeing that this has always been here, or sometimes the way that's interpreted is like it's always been this way. Nothing has ever moved.

But the moment that that is seen, there seems to be a panic mode that happens for the apparent character because its gig is up, the con is over. So it tries to make a case in negotiation because it wants to be that eternal seeker.

It wants to be that, you know, following around speakers, teachers, and it wants a position because without any position that it has nowhere to go. It has nothing to know, it has nothing to grasp. And that can be really disorienting for the character to see that the character is just a thought.

To see that every single history has not really happened, to see that the future does not really appear without any thoughts. So it looks for a landing, it looks for an idea, it looks for a confirmation, it looks for a strategy.

So if it, if it convinces itself that it understood it but somehow lost it, then it continues the seeking again into another loop. It continues the seeking.

For example, one day the character had clarity and it gets angry or gets triggered and everything right away the, the thought will jump in, take over and say that, oh my goodness, I lost that. I don't have that peace anymore. But what's being talked about here is not the movement that's being clarified here. The movement is the illusion.

What I'm talking about can't be talked about. Therefore, it's always here, it's always infinitely here.

And there's going to be fluctuations of back and forth of the character, the seeker and the seeker, when it's seen directly, that is absent. So therefore the seeking is over. Yet when it tries to find a landing, it reignites the seeking again.

Usually it goes to listen to other speakers or tries to confirm it. And of course, speakers and teachers are just talking about orgasms.

They don't have any comprehension of what's happening after the orgasm, when everything is just normal again, they'll put a hint on it. But the highlight of every speaking and in talking is about boundless energy, awareness, whatever is being talked about.

And I'm also guilty of that because sometimes I go into this, to this stream of talk about the directness and the ephemeral, this and everything, but there's really no follow up, right? Because it's supposed to be that way always.

So that's the idea that the seeker has, is that's why it becomes this infinite seeking, is because it's looking for that, that idea of infinite bliss or a different version of it, that there's no me there. Those are just belief systems. Those are just ideas.

And then trying to understand it, trying to conceptualize it, creates this continuation because it can never be understood. No one has ever understood it.

And the seeker now believes that someone gets it and keeps on listening to that speaker in hopes that they can get it one day and hopes that they can hold it one day. But the dilemma is that it's always in the present, it's always in this nowness, it's always in this clarity.

Not by words, not by ideas, not by understanding, not by belief, because those are just static. They're all noise. So the intrinsic desire that leads ones to engage in this very words is just an expression of this infiniteness.

This is just an expression. Beliefs, thoughts, ideas are just expressions. It's nothing to be understood, nothing to get, really.

And I don't really like saying by no one, because that seems to create another belief that when I'm no one, then, you know, then I don't have to do any of this and I don't have to understand. I just have to wait by the grace of the speaker to grant me this clarity.

But the clarity is here, with or without the speaker, with or without any kind of appearances. And you see it in the story anyway, daily.

But the moment that the apparent mind, me character, individual hijacks it and convinces you that there's something missing, then he goes into a seeking mode again, therefore perpetuating, maintaining that seeking energy as a loop. Welcome back. Is Melina dancing over there? Yep. Okay. All right. Okay. So let's go direct and brutal again.

So any cognitive movement, thoughts, ideas, irrespective of its direction or path, acts as a profoundly disruptive force to the harmonious and the tranquil directness of what already is, the unspeakable, the unthinkable, whichever word you might want to call it. But it will always remain wordless.

Because what happens is that any kind of movement, any kind of thinking, any kind of understanding, perceiving is self centered, self focused, which remains entirely indifferent to an individual's experiences or cognition. Such experiences, no matter how extraordinary, hold no intrinsic value to the ineffable.

The pursuit of non dual experience, or a glimpse or dropping away of the me aware of being aware, insert new thing here invariably creates a craving for its repetition, culminating in a desire for a perpetual state of bliss or happiness, or a no me state, or dropping away of the me, a concept that is fundamentally flawed.

So the notion of eternal bliss or permanent happiness or anomie is a fallacy perpetuated by countless texts, repeated by countless speakers, teachers, gurus. Yet it is evident that this pursuit leads nowhere.

The mechanisms and instruments utilized to chase this state or the know me have been shaped by years of diligent effort and will, or even the suggestion that there is no effort or will. The paradox lies in attempting to attain effortlessness through effort or non effort, non doership or doing a goal that is inherently unachievable.

Hence the the notion of an effortless state. Non doership.

No me is simply non existent, doing or non doing, self or no self, me or no me, awareness or non awareness just will keep on going back and forth to the opposite. It's just mind stuff. But there's no mind. Or you can also say that in between mind and no mind, there is this something that can't be figured out.

So the effort to figure out something that can't be, can't be figured out will just keep going back and forth into this loop of seeking, trying to understand, trying to know, trying to cognize something that is already. So the pursuit of that permanence state, true effort is inherently self perpetuating.

It just maintains that self, mind, ego, character, individual, whatever you might want to call it. So any, any attempt to even seize effort is itself an exertion of effort. Again, this cyclical pursuit is maddening.

This pushing one to the brink of insanity, a delusion, a state most fear to be confronted, a belief that no one wants to admit. The realization must basically boil down to that every endeavor to achieve isness, Effortlessness is paradoxically an effort. Even no practice.

Practice is a practice. It's the same thing. Teaching, no teaching, same thing, speaker, teacher, same thing.

Because there is an effort now to figure out what the speaker or teacher is saying. So there's a practice on how to say how to express that there is no me, or how to express that it is aware.

Even the desire to abstain from the effort constitutes effort. The isness or the directness is the absence of any exertion cannot be attained through striving or non striving. Even suggesting is an effort.

Should anyone grasp the futility of these pursuits, the constant alteration of techniques or non techniques. Or maybe I go to different speaker, different teacher is meaningless because you're just going back and forth a belief, non belief is a belief.

Self, no self, same thing. It's maddening. Even questioning the speaking themselves become the obstacle.

Regardless of the speaker's identity, regardless of the speaker's clarity or the teacher's clarity, what's always going to be presented is a version of Netty. Netty. Not this, not this. Hahaha. It's just repackaged again.

So what is being expressed here is elusive because it is not about an understanding in the next. Maybe I will get this in the third session, maybe I will get this in the next.

Maybe there's another speaker that can express this that will zap me out. So it avoids what is constantly being expressed here, that there is no understanding.

This understanding, non understanding is the same because it will just keep on maintaining the character from going from one side to the other. And then when it has a belief system that it remains in that side, then it's planted and then it will, it will protect that belief system.

It will protect their understanding, it will protect their position. Even if that position is no position, it will protect that position because no position is just another position.

So understanding demands the cessation of the quest for understanding both now and in the future. Understanding is an obstacle. Maybe one day I will get this, maybe one day I will know this, maybe one day I will grock this.

But what's being expressed is the inexpressible. In this directness between understanding and non understanding there is a.

I can't even say it, but there is this kind of like what I said, there's this love that is so direct that it doesn't have any conditions. It doesn't have any conditions for you to understand or not to understand. It doesn't have any conditions for you, you and no you the same.

So it's just playing the illusion of separation by going from one corner to the other corner. But what if there are nearly no opposites? And everything that's being said that has an opposite is completely irrelevant.

But the moment that you think that that's relevant, yeah, you know what? There's no awareness, there's no me or it's all awareness. It's all self is irrelevant because that's just a thought.

And even some, even someone will say that you know what, what's being talked about is not a thought, that's still a thought you can't get out of it. There's no way out because there's no way in. It just created an in. So it pretends that there's an out.

But even when you're out, who's out and who's in? The simplicity of this isness, this directness, is often obscured by the complex mental structures that reject it.

The belief that it cannot be that simple, or even the belief that it's already the case or that's it too is a defense mechanism of the mind's intricate complexity.

If you notice, you can blindly follow along and repeat the same thing over and over again until you're indoctrinated and thinking that it's all awareness or there's nothing. And then it becomes a belief system. And then one wonders why you're stuck in the seeking game for so many years.

Because it has morphed into that belief system.

Rather than seeing as the speaking or this kind of speaking as a way out, it becomes a comfort zone, it becomes a resting place, it becomes a location. Something that's familiar, something that can be understood in the next, something that can be held on to, something that can be known.

And then speakers and teachers, including the speaker, by the way, please, you know, I'm basically talking about all of them. All, all. No exclusion. We'll just talk and talk and talk and talk and talk about something that cannot be talked about.

And that's completely all right. That's completely all right. But what's not seeming to be all right is to buy everything that's being said, what's being expressed here.

This discourse is not really that profound. It is repetitious, aiming to dismantle the listeners preconceived notions. So each statement that's being made is negated.

I'm breaking down sandcastles that I built in the last talk. As we speak, this process of continual negation serves no purpose other than to liberate this delusion that there is an opposite, that there is two.

It's just an assertion that there's nothing to understand, there's nothing to get. But seemingly what happens in these talks is that there's always a waiting for the next, for something to pop, something to clear up. How.

How about this for a pop? What if every single word is popping and it's really nothing?

What if every single thing that's being said is completely irrelevant because there is something here that is untouchable? It cannot be touched by words, by meanings, definitions or concepts, but rather by an admission that there is really nothing to get in the next.

So in this clarity, the clarity without words, the clarity that cannot really be understood. I'm not coming from a position that I understand it what's being expressed here, that there's no understanding of it.

And there is a contentment of this clarity of this no next of the time. So it's not a state that's being talked about here because the state is just a delusion.

It's not a permanent state because there's no one to have a permanent state or a. No, no one to have a permanent state. It will just keep on repeating like fractals, basically.

It will just keep on repeating over and over and over again. What's being highlighted here is there's this absence of a tangible goal because the goal is in the next, the capturing. This is in the future.

He's recording. Sorry. Because the unknown cannot be reached or experienced through any approach, positive or negative.

The pursuit of the the unknown is a mere intellectual trick, a self deceptive game.

As long as there is a goal, whether it's to know the unknown or the experience being experienced, you know, the inexperienced, what cannot be experienced. I can't say that word. The approach remains fundamentally positive. The notion to the unknown is the beyond.

Another illusion accepting its existence perpetuates the endless quest to know. So this ceaseless movement will not cease as long as it's driven by the desire to experience what cannot be experienced.

So in this radical directness, more radical than thinking that there is just nothing, more radical than having any ideas, that becomes uncompromising, because that's just another position. But if everything that has ever been said is missing, the point is trying to take you to another position is trying to take you to another belief.

And what seems to happen is the seekers remain in that belief and then now they have a new concept, a new belief, a new understanding.

And they can parade that around as a knowing, as an understanding, even if they call it a not knowing, it can't get out of the word, it can't get out of duality. And then adapts to a new language or adapts into practices. Adapting to a new language is just another practice, by the way.

So what's being expressed here is beyond recognition. Not just by boasting by it, not because like I'm special and I. It's just really beyond words.

The words fall apart because it can only create an opposite. And there's always going to be contradiction because the words will contradict each other. It's going to be paradox all the time.

So the unknown is really the unknown period. And that's enough. And that's absolutely enough. Not for the seeker though. Not when the carrot of no me happens, or the carrot.

Because when this breaks through, what's being said, when the words, words dissolve and the meaning just falters, the belief system goes down the drain and all of the understanding becomes completely irrelevant. There is wideness, something that is unthinkable, but in the directness, not in the next, not in the next.

Not in a negation, not in the declaration or even a proclamation. So please hear between the lines what's being said here. There is this clarity that doesn't have any word.

There's this directness that does not have any opposite. It's illogical. It's not a belief system. I can't create a cult out of this because there's gonna be no followers.

But that's what's being expressed here, right? There is this directness that does not require a tomorrow or a next. There's this immediacy that does not require any kind of knowing.

It's the innocence is that pristine clarity that cannot be said. And I've said way too much. If you have any questions, please go ahead.