Mr. Truth

Posts[Only 1 to 86 exist, for now]:

| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |

| 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 |

| 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 |

| 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 |

| 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 |

| 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 |

| 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 |

| 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 |

| 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 |

| 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 |

Click on the serial numbers above for the respective post.

Refer to the map below.

Major Posts:

1. Awareness Is All There Is

2. Ajata Vada: The No-Doctrine of No-Birth

3. Words of Compassion!

6. Non-Dualism is not what you think it is!

9. Whatever happens, happens perfectly.

20. What are these "appearances"? What is "awareness" of these "appearances"?

25. Non-Dualism is radically inclusive.

37. This post, lol.

47. MEGA POST

54. The Absurdity of Methods.

81. 🤣

Doses:

4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 12, 15, 24, 44, 79, 80, 86

Points Covered:

What is this blog about? -> 1, 2, 6, 20, 25

What is "direct experience"? -> 18, 29, 67

What are "preferences" and "habits"? -> 6, 14, 21, 28, 43, 46

The non-necessity of manifestation -> 6, 13, 14, 19, 21, 36, 38, 43, 45, 54, 58

The pointless point of non-duality. -> 6, 25, 26, 50, 52

Problems? Suffering? Lack? -> 3, 17, 46, 49

Is everything unreal? -> 42, 43, 78

Is reading this blog necessary? -> 16, 22, 26

Self-inquiry and related -> 1, 2, 3, 20

Why this instead of that? -> 6, 9, 48, 54, 64

Things to know:

Consider reading the relevant posts before sending an ask – chances are it has already been answered, implicitly or explicitly.

Ask box is open. Responses may not be quick, but I try to answer every ask whenever I can.

DMs are open.

This blog is more like a mirror pointed at the sun. It only shows the light that you are, albeit imperfectly, as is the case with mirrors in general. Appreciation is welcome but none of this is doctrine. This isn't a coaching or guidance blog, either.

At the end of the day, introspection, intuition and direct experience reflect the sun better.

Maybe non-dualism is not for me cuz you mention that what you believe is what exists or what you believe arises in the awareness.

You know what my mind says : oh, so you are going through abuse rn cuz you believe you deserve this?

Even though this is not what you said, it's how my mind interprets it. So imma get back to this once I'm in a safe environment.

You mentioned that it's not about changing the belief either and everything is perfect as it should be.

How does one introspect or contemplate without the mind? Direct experience is not an option cuz my mind won't allow me to be present as it's not a safe environment.

Just venting you don't have to reply to this.

I didn't see that coming. 😭

I don't actually know how I am supposed to respond here. Stay safe is all I can tell you.

Anyway, I won't ignore your question.

That's right. It's not "you believe you deserve this". In fact, it's not even a "you" believing anything. I was extra careful while asserting this but I guess I failed. The words failed.

It's not exactly "your" belief of it or anything, it's just that there's a belief or an assumption. Whatever you are going through is happening. No denying that. Like how pain in a dream is apparent but is fully experienced. It's just a mental narrative that's being experienced by "you" which is also a mental narrative. Even this "mental narrative" is itself a mental narrative.

This "direct experience" you speak of already is the case. "you" are already experiencing your beliefs or narratives. It's already clear that this experience that's happening here and now is just... happening. There's nothing more to it. There's nothing dramatic here. It's just the simple fact of what's happening right now. It's experience seemingly experiencing itself.

Anyway, yes, there's nothing to change, because "change" itself is a belief. Forcing another belief is just more nonsense. These beliefs are just beliefs and don't actually exist in any sense. They seem to, but they clearly don't. That was the entire point of calling them "beliefs" but of course, the mind twists it and interprets it in any way it likes. I expected that, but this is the best I can do.

I hope everything works out for you. Stay safe. Take care of yourself.

Excuse my reading comprehension skills, lol.

I am just going to answer the first part.

There's nothing to understand. It's plain, simple and obvious. I already know that all these narratives are just narratives. There is no proof of their existence which isn't also a narrative. They only appear to exist when they actually appear to exist. Otherwise, they have no existence. They don't even appear otherwise. Obviously, this is all there is to it.

Claiming that “it exists” despite that is just an extra conclusion which is itself made up. It's contradictory to take something "made up" as "real" when even the ideas of "real", "fake" etc. are all made up. No sense to be made here.

Your latest really simplified a lot of things but I am confused with, I believe it is and thus part I didn't really understand that so if you can kindly explain that in depth as you posted in your latest post

I used that phrasing so as to prevent any conflation. But that was the cause for your confusion, lol.

Anyway, it was to point out how there's no such thing as:

believing X creating a concrete X, believing X reflecting a concrete X, believing X itself being a concrete X etc.

There's only the belief of X which itself is of no substance. So, this "belief of X" is not concrete. It's still nothing. There's only the "belief of X" is equivalent to saying nothing actually exists, because there's no substance to this "belief". There is no need to get entangled in my usage of the word "belief" either. You can also use "imagination". When you imagine an apple(like that "real" apple you ate, that's right, it was imagination/belief/assumption), this imagined apple is all there is. No actual apple. But you don't say this "imagined apple" itself is a thing with substance. It's also of no substance. That's the entire point of calling it "imagined".

The imagination of an apple is itself imagined. There's no substance to any of this. Neither is it true in any sense nor is it a "concrete" lie. It lacks existence altogether.

The only thing there is is...

No "I", no "me", no "imagination", no "belief", no "world" etc.

There is no "how to".

I know I shouldn't be answering this at all because I lack the context. I will just treat this like another "how to do X" question.

Either the narrative X appears or it doesn't. And this itself is a narrative.

I suggest referring to the masterlist.

I genuinely couldn't stop laughing at the absurdity of my stupidity. Now, I cannot stop laughing at the absurdity of your stupidity.

This might sound harsh but it's actually quite funny.

I keep scrolling and scrolling tumblr and I always find 9999+ misinterpretations of the same thing the “non-dualists” say. Not to mention how funny the “non-dualists” tag people give us(I am assuming I am included, idk, lol).

Change one single sentence and you have found a new way to misinterpret the same thing.

They use the word "imagination", and you make it into "manifestation".

They use the word "peace", and you make it into "enduring a pathetic life".

They use the word "nothing", and you make it into nihilism.

They use " ", and you make it into a practice of catching the space between and pervading all there is.

They use the word "appearing", and you make it into fate, script, destiny or a puppet show.

There's more but this is enough for now.

Oof. I used to do this too, lol. So if you find all of this relatable, you get where it's all coming from.

Do you seriously think all these "non-dualists" who were probably(most assuredly) entangled in the hell of manifestation, shifting, or at least, chasing desires etc. would settle for something like "peace", a "practice of detachment", "oh it's all fake who cares", "let's go and meditate in a cave". I mean, they could be interested in all this, but for the sake of the argument, let's just assume it makes no sense.

I don't think they would settle for any less than total and unconditional freedom, in EVERY. LITERAL. SENSE. OF. THE. WORD. Yeah, and neither would I nor did I, lol.

Of course, there aren't any real "people" either, like in a dream where everything is just mental, or should I say like in experience in general, where everything is just as mental. So, it's not like they should behave "logically" but it also doesn't mean they aren't behaving with any consistency. Dreams don't have to be logical but it doesn't mean they aren't internally consistent or coherent. Not like there's any "logic" beyond the narrative of it.

If someone tells you something in a dream, and you know it's a dream, do you take what they say as truth? Isn't what they say, do, etc. all an imaginary narrative in the first place?

In other words:

It's not "There are people". It's just "I believe there are people."

It's not "There is a world". It's just "I believe there's a world".

It's not "I can't shift". It's just "I believe I can't shift".

Yeah, and last but not least:

It's not "I exist". It's just "I believe I exist".

I just hesitated a lot to use the phrasing "I believe", but I trust that you will understand what I mean. Oh wait, who am I kidding! Anyway, to be clear, it's not an "I" that's an independent thing that exists, which "believes". Even this "I" is itself a belief.

If everything is just a belief, and there's no "thing", only the "belief there's a thing"... it means any belief can occur and that would be the thing itself. NO, THIS IS NOT THE LAW OF ATTRACTION OR ASSUMPTION OR WHATEVER.

It's not sticking with a "belief", so the 3D can change or whatever.

The 3D is nothing but the "belief there is a 3D".

If you see a 3D, it's just that you believe there is a 3D. You believe you see a 3D.

If nothing's changing, it's just that you believe nothing's changing.

And NO, there's no "outside" which you then use as evidence to conclude that you are not “believing hard enough”. Either you believe it is or it isn't. It is or it isn't. It's not, "I believe it is" and thus, "it is". There's only "I believe it is". I repeat: THERE'S ONLY THE BELIEF THAT SOMETHING IS. In other words, everything is purely, utterly mental. The mind itself is purely, utterly mental.

Therefore, if "you don't see something good", congratulations. You are wrong, lol. You are merely believing you don't see something good.

Hmmm, for example, “I believe there's a world and I believe I am a human being and I believe I am quite limited in what I do and I believe life is quite pathetic". Thus... NO, there's no thus or therefore after this. It's just belief. Once again, it's not "I believe it is and thus, it is". It's just "I believe it is". THE END. No buts! That's the end.

So, what do you believe? What do you believe that you believe? What "you" do you believe?

Also, yeah, this "belief" is synonymous with "imagination", "assumption", "storytelling", "knowing" etc. OMG, the word "assumption" gets on my nerves for some reason. I wonder why. 😤

Oh, I forgot to add to my point. Like I said, what you believe you see is what you believe you see. So, if you don't see any "non-dualists"(to be precise, you don't believe you see any "non-dualists"...) magically creating unicorns and creating supernovas out of nowhere, then of course... you just don't believe you see any or that it could be possible. No, our supposed lack of superpowers doesn't contradict anything we are saying. What you believe is what you believe. All we are pointing out is how everything is a fabrication, a conjured up narrative, etc. and that the only truth is...

(no, there's nothing to fill in, not even "nothing".)

(I just realised I could have used bold text mid-way but I am too lazy to edit the rest.)

Anyway, that's the limitless creative potential they all talk about. Guess what it means? No, they are not saying there's some external god that's doing what it wants. The point is... if all is just a belief, then you can freely believe anything.

Of course, one might force oneself to believe something while they are already believing something else. That's the definition of delusion. That's not what is being talked about, here.

Right now, you are believing something "undesirable" and of course, you are also believing that it is undesirable. That's okay. I guess you could call this a "habit" of believing something, which is once again a "belief". It's hard to explain but... I guess you could say since you see that it is all "belief", you will eventually believe something else because now you see that the only thing you believe was stopping you from something else is also a belief. So confusing, I know, but this is the best I can do. Note that this "eventually" implies this "belief" is in the future, but there is no "future". This is why it's hard to explain. The best I can say is if you are believing in X, that's the end. If you are believing in Y, that's the end. There's no separation between the belief of X and the belief of Y. The belief of X is the the belief of Y because both are equally beliefs. So, there's no need to force yourself to believe Y. That introduces separation which is utterly false. If there's a belief of X, that's the end. If there's a belief of Y, that's the end. And both beliefs are actually the same belief because there's no separation.

This is what happens when I try to put into words. 😵‍💫

Kind of like how when you thought something was true and cried a lot at some point in your life, but when you saw that it was just a thought or a belief, you stopped crying and that belief stopped showing up eventually. Again, this "eventually" still implies a "future", which is also a belief. I have no words that could explain this any better. Everything is HERE and NOW, effortlessly and perfectly. It's impossible to make sense of this. Language cannot capture this. Language only makes sense when there's separation, distinction etc. but it cannot meaningfully describe what "no separation" implies.

Of course, this is really confusing and I admit it. But, that's not a bug. It's a feature. You cannot explain it no matter how hard you try. It's inexplicable. If you find it confusing, that's wonderful. If you didn't find it confusing, I would be worried because then it would mean a narrative was being taken as some truth. This... inexplicable uncertainty... is the point. There is no need to find an explanation that doesn't exist. After all, even "sense" is ultimately manufactured.

I hesitate to say that direct experience is the way because like, what you believe you have right here and now is already a direct experience of what you believe you have right here and now. There's nothing to "achieve". It's already a belief in and of itself. It's already "direct experience" in and of itself.

Is this "boring"? Is this "interesting"? It's just what you believe, anyway. If you believe this is boring, that is what you believe. If I believe this is interesting, this is what I believe. And so on.

Anyway, this "freedom" shows you how you can freely believe in "being limited", "being unlimited", "getting what you want", "getting what you don't want" etc. There's no limit to what stories can be written, obviously. You clearly don't need me to tell you that. There was never any need for anything at all, anyway.

So, technically, if you believe that you are a limited, helpless creature constantly chasing around desires and at the mercy of the external world... it's not wrong to do so. It's also a nice story. But er, it's just a belief, lol.

So... let's just do what we want, or should I say, let's just believe what we want... like we always did, shall we?

Oh, yeah, and while I am at it, these "desires" are also what you believe to have. Not anything special.

And when the bloggers say... “don't bother with these ideas”, “don't take any of it seriously” and so on... they are just talking about how it's all "beliefs". Nothing concrete. I don't take beliefs all that seriously, do you?

Oops, I yapped way too much... didn't I? If I don't stop, I will keep yapping forever. I'll stop. 😭

Oh wait, just one more thing. "ignorance", "realisation" and "recognition", "enlightened" also don't make sense because if all of this was just a belief all along, you never were "ignorant", there was never a time you "realised or recognised" something. It was all just believing. Nothing more.

Anyway, how is this not "total and unconditional freedom"? You see how we didn't settle for anything less?

I'll stop for real, now. 🙏

My aesthetic is bleh... sorry if the post doesn't look attractive. Oh wait, there's no aesthetic at all here. 😭

Literally. Obviously.

True freedom is total and unconditional.

Does an author ask the character in the story what to write in the next scene? Does a story have to be such that the character gets everything it wants? Pfft.

In this blog, everything is referred to as a "story".

The point of that was to point out how they don't actually exist in any sense. In other words, there's nothing there to point at and call it a "story". So, what's there to talk about? What is a "story"? What is "anything"? There's nothing there to deny or accept. There's nothing there to even consider. None of this makes any sense.

All there is is...

Lol.

If you are asking this to conclude something about me or you or what "shifting" is... then, obviously, I would call it another "story" which is no different from any other story.

If you are asking this simply out of curiosity... then my answer would be "No".

But of course, my answer means nothing. It doesn't tell you if it's possible or impossible. I am no authority. In fact, I am just another made up "story". You don't seek validation from a story. Stories are just fabricated. That's their entire point.

And that X was something... well, it doesn't matter what, because whatever you can think of is a story.

And my answer to that is:

Exactly. It's a story which appears when it appears, disappears when it disappears.

It's the same as wealth, beauty, fame, superpowers etc. All of these are equally stories.

Another way to look at this is considering it a movie.

In a movie, a lot of scenes occur. The present scene may be any of: a scene of suffering, a scene of a fall, a scene of a rise, a scene of peace, a scene of fear, a scene of success, a scene of magic, a scene of a strange kind of "click", a scene of things aligning, a scene of creating a sequential narrative retrospectively, a scene of losing control, a scene of a fall, a scene of a rise, a scene of being trapped... it goes on and on. No scene is permanent. But this fact isn't supposed to make you feel better or give you peace. It's just how it is.

Will it stop your "suffering"? No. It's a scene that appears on its own and leaves on its own. Your scene of "recognition" or "understanding" or "I killed my ego" is separate from it.

Regardless, whatever the scene may be... it's perfect as is and exactly what should be in the present moment, even if the scene is "trying to fix things", "confusion", whatever.

I was starting to wonder if my language was cryptic. That would be the opposite of my intention. But hearing this, I feel relieved. I am glad you enjoy reading my posts. Thank you. <3

Habit is just a label for "unpreffered stories appearing for as long as they do" which you observe.

A story of "no lag" might appear, but even that appears when it appears.

This "lag", "delay", "time" etc. just describe the nature of these stories. Also stories, yes, but a feature of these stories.

Moreover, these are all illusions in the sense they are generally understood. There's only the present moment. The past and the future are all extra stories, which you may entertain, but still just extras.

For example, a story of "poverty" appears for as long as it does. Then a story of "wealth" appears. Was there a necessary "duration"? No, it's just how we interpret this "change" of stories, which is another story.

So, a story of "no lag" makes no sense, because that's describing an interpretation of stories. You are comparing two stories, and having another story serve as an interpretation of the change from one story to the other.

The idea is just that a story appears for as long as it does. And these seemingly "persistent" stories are just stories that appear out of habit. Just a simple explanation. You may freely discard this explanation, but you do observe their appearance and seeming persistence. Call it "momentum" or whatever. It's the same idea.

This experience you prefer shall appear when it appears. Why do you believe you have to do something for it to appear?

Whatever is happening in your life are all stories. Painful, maybe. Distressing, maybe. But no matter how terrible they are, they are all "passing" phenomena. They are not permanent.

Yes, it makes sense you prefer to escape these circumstances quickly. But, there is no NEED to escape, because whatever these stories are just stories you dislike. Not existential threats, which is just another story, but you get the point. But these stories shall dissolve when they shall.

And this remains the case regardless of whether you understand what I say or don't. There is nothing you do that is inherently wrong or irreversible. Whatever's happening shall cease to happen and a new story shall emerge naturally, REGARDLESS of whether you do this or that.

If they are continuing to appear, it's not because you are doing something wrong or because other stories cannot appear. They just appear for as long as they do. This is similar to how you might have a habit of doing something, but that habit shall drop when it drops, but it's just a habit anyway. Not a mark of your "incapability" which is an absurd story.

​These were the contradictions I kept dwelling on when I was deep into the Law of Assumption. If the world consists of nothing but my own awareness, why do people who write posts, reviews, and methodologies even exist within my story? What if my story unfolds with me becoming a green alien, and I post a selfie on Tumblr to prove it?

These stories of "I", "you", "they" are all equally stories, though. If they are stories, they are obviously free to appear. Any story can appear. Isn't that what freedom is? Isn't that what limitless potential is?

All of those are equally stories.

Compare "blinking" to all of that. Do you see any difference other than the current absence of the other stories? The rest is all interpretations which are just more passing thoughts. They don't affect the stories.