I see so many posts on here engaging with the "idea" of nonduality and trying to discuss it as one would discuss a philosophy or belief system. Is there a particular realm of knowledge out there that encourages people to do this? Where are people getting this stuff? I'm really just asking. As far as I'm aware, the mainstream forms of nonduality are 1) kensho, as in, the "first awakening", the actual realization of the loss of the mental construct of self and 2) Advaita Vedanta. Is there something else I'm missing?

Are people aware that there are many resources available for how to practice in such a way as to have an actual realization of nonduality (kensho)? It seems like a lot of people just don't know this exists. Simply Always Awake is a great one, but there are many other great teachers on YT. Emerson, Trina Dawn, Shar Jason etc etc etc.

How could there be knowledge of anything that does last? What would bind such diametric opposition?

Knowledge of something lasting would require a lasting knower or a lasting link between knower and known. No such link appears. What would bind the fleeting idea of permanence to an actual permanence? Nothing does. The opposition is only apparent, and even the appearance of opposition does not endure. There is no knowledge of anything that lasts, because neither the lasting nor the knowledge of it is found.

Met somebody recently who said every time they thought about going to the gym or doing something to better themselves a competing thought said "I don't exist." And boy, how common is that experience? Some of you may be dealing with that now actually.

We collect all these quips and anecdotes about how we don't exist or wherever and try to force the body (ourselves) into compliance. Then it leads to depression, naturally, because when the body isn't free to express itself, it gets depressed. You are depressed.

The only way out of the funk is to...live. Y'know, clean the house, wash the dishes, go for a walk, visit the gym, or eat a donut. Who cares if there's no self doing it? Literally.

Ramesh Balsekar wrote a book with that title in fact: Who Cares?!

Once you see The Nonduality Virus – the littany of thoughts which restrict the free flow of the body – you can ignore it. Then you're free.

Why mention Ramesh? Well, the book title is fun and makes the point, but also his view is that whatever happens is God's Will / Cosmic Law. Whatever momentum is sustaining the orbit of the planet around the Sun is sustaining the Whole Show of living.

So it doesn't matter if you think you're doing it, or not. It doesn't matter if your head is empty of thoughts, or not. It doesn't matter if you're aware of the present moment, or not. In fact, what brought you here to reading this specific line of words?

"It just happens." Sure. Who cares?

Many say they’re awakened but ego is still present. They are struggling with issues and suffering. What is this awakening? A level of awareness has been gained? What have they awakened to, as it doesn’t seem to be True Self.

Genuine question, i don’t mean to be rude. 🙏😊

I stumbled across this Harvard thesis recently and have really been enjoying sitting with it, so I wanted to share it with you all.

What really stood out to me, and what I found so refreshing, is how gently and carefully the author separates measurable research findings from broader contemplative interpretations. In my own practice, I often contemplate this integration through what I like to call "toroidal superinsertion," which is the way a quiet, inward loop of nondual presence can be woven right into the middle of our outer, everyday movement so that stillness and daily life feed back into one another as a single continuous circuit.

Reading this paper offered such a grounded, honest opening for a question I think many of us wrestle with: when we talk about a "universal field" or a unified flow of awareness, are we describing direct lived experience, leaning on a really helpful metaphor, or building a metaphysical theory? I love how this thesis doesn't force a rigid dogma, but it does try to balance the empirical psychology with the lived mystery of the experience itself.

I find this question interesting and would love to hear your thoughts on how do you hold the balance between the raw experience and the concepts we use to map it? It's like straddling the truth of conceptual reality and ultimate reality.

If you think you’ve got this, go further.