I have watched all the satsangs, nothing has clicked, and I can still say to myself, 'In this moment, I am not happy.' What this says to me, is that I am a terrible and stupid seeker, malconditiioned by life to be unskilful, oblivious and incompetent. Failing to deeply realize that I am not the doer, that life is predetermined, that happiness cant be found in outcomes and that misperception and wrongthinking are causing all of my suffering, instead of blaming life for what life has put in place, I find myself hating myself for remaining deluded and stuck, for causing my own suffering, for not achieving enlightenment and for one more failure in life.
@Free Doms Good comment. It is a mystery. I feel this too, but somehow still steep myself in the teachings, knowing that in this lifetime it may not click. That's ok. The mystery compels me to carry on... probably for innumerous more lifetimes! 🙄😊
Hi, there’s a satsang from 2 years ago named “ you are not the creator of toughts, emotions and feeling, rather…”. Here he is talking about this situation, where there’s doership appearing in the “practice” of this teaching. For anyone who is interested ☺️.
I'm glad that Roger's teaching includes critical thinking. I have heard so many new nonduality teachers saying things like "reality is both real and unreal" which to me sounds like sheer nonsense since reality is simply real. There is nothing unreal about reality. Even Maya in Hindu religions has been explained by how only Brahman is real and that Maya and Brahman are one.
@@ReverendDr.Thomas Maybe I should have explained what I mean by real and unreal and why nothing is unreal. As a simple example take statement S = "2 +2 = 5" which describes a false result, yet S itself is real and if asking a question like "Does statement S exist?" then the answer is yes. Similarly, everything in reality is like that. There is nothing about reality itself that is unreal. Definitions are tricky, so I will give you a counter question: What is your definition of definition?
@@ReverendDr.Thomas Yes, a circular reasoning. That's the problem with definitions since the term definition itself leads to a tautology. But it's possible to give surface definitions of course, such as from Oxford Languages: "reality; noun: the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them." And my claim is that it's impossible to point to something unreal other than as an idea of it.
I'd much rather be fooled into happiness than to know the truth.
I have watched all the satsangs, nothing has clicked, and I can still say to myself, 'In this moment, I am not happy.'
What this says to me, is that I am a terrible and stupid seeker, malconditiioned by life to be unskilful, oblivious and incompetent. Failing to deeply realize that I am not the doer, that life is predetermined, that happiness cant be found in outcomes and that misperception and wrongthinking are causing all of my suffering, instead of blaming life for what life has put in place, I find myself hating myself for remaining deluded and stuck, for causing my own suffering, for not achieving enlightenment and for one more failure in life.
Schau Dir Louise Kay an. Mein Tipp für Dich.
@Free Doms Good comment. It is a mystery. I feel this too, but somehow still steep myself in the teachings, knowing that in this lifetime it may not click. That's ok. The mystery compels me to carry on... probably for innumerous more lifetimes! 🙄😊
Hi, there’s a satsang from 2 years ago named “ you are not the creator of toughts, emotions and feeling, rather…”. Here he is talking about this situation, where there’s doership appearing in the “practice” of this teaching. For anyone who is interested ☺️.
I'm glad that Roger's teaching includes critical thinking. I have heard so many new nonduality teachers saying things like "reality is both real and unreal" which to me sounds like sheer nonsense since reality is simply real. There is nothing unreal about reality. Even Maya in Hindu religions has been explained by how only Brahman is real and that Maya and Brahman are one.
In your own words, define “REALITY”. ☝️🤔☝️
@@ReverendDr.Thomas Maybe I should have explained what I mean by real and unreal and why nothing is unreal. As a simple example take statement S = "2 +2 = 5" which describes a false result, yet S itself is real and if asking a question like "Does statement S exist?" then the answer is yes. Similarly, everything in reality is like that. There is nothing about reality itself that is unreal. Definitions are tricky, so I will give you a counter question: What is your definition of definition?
@@Anders01 TAUTOLOGY. 🙄
@@ReverendDr.Thomas Yes, a circular reasoning. That's the problem with definitions since the term definition itself leads to a tautology. But it's possible to give surface definitions of course, such as from Oxford Languages: "reality; noun: the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them." And my claim is that it's impossible to point to something unreal other than as an idea of it.
@@Anders01 Have you CAREFULLY read my initial comment?☝️
If not, I suggest you re-read it.
How do you deal with heartbreak in this tradition?
Kindly subscribe to my Spiritual Psychotherapy Services channel for videos on online counselling:
ruclips.net/channel/UCU5fGxsZF_uMGpoihHqQv8w
@@steevinchi That was beautifully stated, Steve.
@@steevinchi Amen. Well put.
You must learn to recognize that you are not the heartbreak. Everything that is observable, you cannot be. Only what you are is not observable.
@@esistwieesist6835, that presupposes freedom of volition.