Q&A

Q. If something is believed, that’s the way it is in truth for the believer.  The believer is the doer, the doer suffers as does the believer.

A. Belief doesn’t make a “someone” real, it’s just a thought claiming there’s a believer. The sense of a doer is just another appearance. Suffering shows up when the thought “this is me” is taken as true, but the believer, the doer, the sufferer… all of that is just thought content appearing on its own.

Q. Learn to forget yourself.

You will be rewarded

A.  There’s no one who can learn to forget themselves. The one who would do the forgetting is the very thing that’s imagined. When that’s seen, the idea of a reward falls away, because the one who could receive it was never there.

Q. The questions of "Who?", "When?", "Where?" and "What?" mean a person, time and space.

Are these conjured by the mind or real?

A. Those questions only appear with the sense of a person in time and space. They rise in mind because that’s all the mind can know. What’s here is prior to all of it.

Q. I am on my spiritual and intellectual journey. I’m interested in concepts that break paradigms. I’m particularly interested in things where there is, or potentially is, some evidence that links to the Western Scientific Tradition

A. Nonduality isn’t about collecting concepts or lining them up with science. It’s about seeing what’s here before any paradigm forms. The scientific angle can be interesting to the mind, but it’s still just another distraction. What’s pointed to in nonduality doesn’t depend on any of that.

Q. Mind remains restless till it encounters its source.

A. The mind is restless because it keeps imagining it’s separate from the very awareness it appears in. All that happens is just the moment when the mind stops insisting it’s the one doing, choosing, seeking, or arriving. The mind is just trying to maintain itself, when that effort drops, what’s here is obvious.

It’s OK That There’s Not a Me

For many who come to this, the first thing heard is that the “me” they’ve carried their whole lives isn’t actually there. The mind pushes back because it has spent years building and protecting that idea. It feels personal, it feels important, it feels like everything depends on it. Yet what’s being pointed to is simple… the me was never more than a thought believed, a habit picked up early and never questioned.

There can be a hesitation here, a sense that letting go of the me is like stepping off a cliff. The mind doesn’t know how to move without the identity it has always used. It doesn’t see that the same mind created the sense of a self and the suffering that led to the search. What’s being pointed to isn’t a loss, it’s the seeing that nothing was ever held in the first place.

As the looking continues, something begins to show itself… life keeps moving even without a me at the center of it. The body wakes, breathes, walks, speaks… thoughts appear, feelings rise and fall, the world unfolds as it always has. Nothing stops, nothing collapses… the absence of a me doesn’t take anything away, it only removes the imagined owner of what was already happening.

It becomes clear that the me was never doing any of it. It was never the source of decisions, never the controller of outcomes, never the author of thought or emotion. It was only a story laid over the flow of life. When that story loosens, life doesn’t become empty or strange, it becomes simple, immediate, unburdened.

There is no need to hold anything together, no need to defend an identity, no need to maintain a narrative about who this is supposed to be. Life moves the way it always has, only now without the strain of pretending to be someone steering it. The clarity isn’t dramatic… it’s a recognition that nothing was ever missing, nothing was ever required, and nothing was ever personal.

The fear that once felt like standing at the edge of a cliff eases. It’s seen that there is no cliff, no fall, no danger… only the end of an illusion that never had substance. What remains is the same life that was always here, only now without the tension of a separate self woven through it.

In that, something simple is unmistakable… it’s finally OK to not be… it’s OK that there’s no me.

Not a Belief, Not a Debate

Nonduality is often misunderstood because people try to treat it like a belief system, a worldview, or a position someone takes… it isn’t any of that. It doesn’t rest on belief or disbelief, and it isn’t concerned with concepts that depend on taking a side. It isn’t something you adopt, defend, or agree with, it’s simply the seeing of what is already here before any idea about it. It is not a mental exercise in logic or psychology, and it isn’t something to figure out with the mind. Some come to argue because it seems to defy cherished beliefs about people and the world, yet nonduality doesn’t even need to be understood, you are in it now, there is no getting out of it.

Because of this, debating it is pointless. It doesn’t rely on proof to be what it is, and it doesn’t need anyone’s belief to stand. It isn’t something to preach or spread. The words arise here only to share, not to convince anyone of anything.

This is why when someone shows up attempting to debunk it, I stop wasting time and words… nonduality is not a subject for argument. It doesn’t need to be proven or disproven, it is what is prior to any thought about it.

There is no teacher, no master, no student, no leader and no follower… these are ideas the mind clings to. Any real sharing is just a friendly offering.

Nonduality doesn’t argue, persuade, or care whether anyone understands. If there is sincere looking, it reveals itself. Words can only point, they cannot do more than that. It is only the seeing that reveals it, and in this seeing the clarity of nonduality is apparent... this too is only a pointer if it can be seen.

The Fright of No-Self

 

The absence of a self feels frightening because the mind only knows life through a center it believes is real. Without that center, it imagines a kind of disappearance. But what’s actually seen is simple... everything is connected, appearing in the same awareness, with no separate owner. The fear belongs to the mind trying to protect its story... the ease comes when that story isn’t needed.

The Ego in Guru Form

The ego can reshape itself the moment it enters spiritual territory. It stops looking like fear and starts looking like certainty, speaking with authority, as if it has been appointed to guide lost souls out of darkness. It becomes a character, a sage in its own mind, and it believes the role so fully that it cannot see the costume it is wearing.

It often begins with a simple rejection, a pointer about the absence of a separate self is offered and it cannot tolerate it. The idea that the “me” is not the center of experience feels threatening, so the self is defended automatically. The pointer is dismissed, not because it is unclear, but because it challenges the identity being protected. More than that, a “no‑self” message leaves nothing out there to admire them, follow them, or validate their role. A savior identity cannot survive without believers.

From there, the metaphysical dressing is demonstrated… bigger stories arise about eternal souls and cosmic missions. The self is declared real and everlasting. Spiritual language is used to reinforce the very thing spirituality is meant to question. The character steps into the savior role, claiming a mission to liberate others, speaking as if it has been chosen for a higher purpose. There is no attempt to understand anything, it is simply the self trying to preserve itself by becoming something holy.

Anyone offering genuine insight eventually runs into this, it is not surprising. But for the sincere seeker, it can be confusing. Confidence can look like wisdom, spiritual language can look like depth, performance can look like truth. The seeker may not yet see the difference between a pointer that dissolves identity and a role that depends on identity to survive.

The truth does not need a savior or a mission, it stands on its own, without identity, without costume, without a character to play it.

Pain Is Real, Suffering Is Added

You know, pain is real, nobody has to pretend otherwise. When the body hurts, it hurts, and there’s no spiritual trick that makes that magically disappear. Pain shows up the way anything shows up… it’s just there, and you feel it, and that’s that.

But the suffering part, that’s different. The suffering isn’t the pain itself, it’s everything the mind piles on top of it. The story about how it shouldn’t be happening, or how long it’s going to last, or why it’s happening to you, or what it means about your life. That whole deal is where the heaviness comes from. The pain is one thing… the “me” who claims it is another. There’s the physical suffering of the pain itself, and then there’s the mental suffering the mind builds around it, and they’re not the same thing.

When you look closely, the pain is just a sensation happening in the body, but the suffering is the mind saying “this is my pain, this is happening to me,” and that’s where the gripping starts. The moment that imagined owner steps in, everything gets heavier.

None of this means you stop caring… none of this means compassion disappears. If anything, compassion gets clearer, because you’re not tangled up in the story anymore. You just see pain for what it is, in yourself or in someone else, and there’s a natural easing that happens. You don’t need a “me” to feel compassion, it just shows up on its own when the struggle quiets down.

This understanding doesn’t erase physical suffering. The body still does what it does… it still aches, it still throbs, it still gets sick, it still breaks down. Seeing through the “me” doesn’t give you some special pass out of being human. It just removes the extra layer that turns pain into a personal drama.

So the pain might still be there, but the one who suffers… that starts to loosen, the story around it starts to fade. What’s left is just the raw sensation, without the weight of “why me” or “how long” or “this is unbearable.” Those thoughts can very well still arise but they are seen as the conditioning playing out, and they fade until only the pain is left unlabeled as “my pain.”

It’s not about denying anything, it’s about seeing what’s actually happening, without the added noise. In that seeing, something settles, something opens, something stops fighting… there’s no losing compassion in this understanding, it’s still right there, untouched, because it never depended on a story in the first place.

I Can’t Understand It for You

All that I can do is offer some insight, point back to that which cannot be expressed, only indicated, because this is not something that can be handed over like information, it is not something that can be transferred from one mind to another. What was handed down here is only the pointing, only the reminder, only the gesture toward what is already present, already shining, already known before the mind begins its search. The seeing itself cannot be given, only the invitation to look.

It is up to you to do the work of self inquiry, to peel away the layers of illusion, to look directly at the one who is asking the questions, because no one can see this for you and no one can walk into the heart of this on your behalf. The most anyone can do is point, and even that is only useful if it turns your attention back to the seeing that is already happening. The pointer is not the truth, it is only the invitation, and the invitation is always to look at what is looking.

Once it is seen, all of the questions drop away, not because they were answered, but because the one who was asking them is no longer taken to be real. Until then it is understandable that there are all kinds of questions, all kinds of confusion, all kinds of attempts to grasp this with the mind, but no answer that the mind can hold onto is ever going to resonate, because the mind is not the place where this is known. The true pointer bypasses the thinking process and opens the clarity that is already there, the clarity that has always been there, the clarity that does not need to be created or improved or perfected.

You may be detecting what appears to be a contradiction, saying that only you can do this and there is no you. You may ask, if there is no one here, who is going to do the inquiry or look directly. This is only the mind trying to hold two ideas at once, the idea of a someone and the seeing that there is no someone, and the mind imagines conflict where there is none. But the invitation remains the same, because inquiry does not require a someone, it only requires the looking itself. 

The mind does not believe this, the mind believes there is a someone there doing something, a someone who must understand, a someone who must achieve, a someone who must awaken, and as long as that belief is knocking around, put it to work, let it investigate who you are, let it turn its attention back on itself, let it look for the one who is supposedly confused or seeking or trying to get somewhere. This is the only place where the illusion can unravel, because it unravels in the looking, not in the thinking, not in the believing, not in the collecting of spiritual ideas.

I am simply pointing back to the simple fact of being aware, pointing back to the recognition that the seeker is the illusion, because once the attention turns inward, once it looks for the one who is supposedly on the path, the whole structure begins to collapse. The mind cannot survive that kind of looking, because the mind depends on the assumption that there is a someone there to be improved, a someone there to be enlightened, a someone there to be liberated.

This can only come from direct inquiry and direct seeing, not from my saying this, not from anyone’s teaching, not from any philosophy or system or explanation. All this is is a jumping off point, a simple invitation, a quiet nudge toward what is already here, and you have to take the leap to see that no one is there to jump. The whole structure collapses in the seeing, and what remains is the simplicity that was never absent.

The truth is already the case, the seeing is already happening, and this points to the same thing, the same simplicity, the same undeniable presence that does not need to be earned or achieved or understood. It only needs to be noticed.

Look in your own experience, see what is already aware and present. You are, and you know that you are. Use self inquiry to peel back what you are not, and it reveals that which cannot be deconstructed.

One‑Upmanship and Trolling in Nonduality Groups

Anyone who has spent any time in nonduality groups has seen this, because the moment someone speaks from a simple, grounded place, some voice will rise up out of the shadows to correct them, to outdo them, to sound more radical, more absolute, more uncompromising, and it becomes this endless spiral of one‑upmanship where nobody is actually listening and nobody is actually seeing, they are just trying to win a game that has nothing to do with clarity at all.

The pattern is predictable, mechanical, and it goes like this. Someone asks a question, then there is a comment with some insight, and next someone jumps in with the automatic negation, the reflexive contradiction, where whatever is offered is immediately dismissed and whatever is dismissed is dismissed again, as if negation itself were the highest truth, the spiritual version of saying “I know you are but what am I.” And no matter what is said, no matter how clear the pointer is, this interloper is going to say it is not that, they will try to turn a clear pointer on its ear by back flipping into a more radical sounding position, because they are not really offering insight, they have none, they have only learned to do the verbal gymnastics of the advaita shuffle to sound as if there is some deeper understanding.

And mixed in with these one‑uppers are the flat‑out trolls, the ones who are not even pretending to offer clarity, the ones who jump into any thread only to contradict whatever is said, the ones who say things like “there is a someone there,” or “how can you say there is no one when you said it,” or “who is making the statement,” not because they are inquiring, but because their only purpose is to provoke, to stir conflict, to derail the conversation. They do not know what any of this means, they only know how to say “that is wrong,” and they offer nothing but antagonizing and confusion for the sincere seeker who is genuinely trying to understand.

It is not depth, it is not radicality, it is not truth, it is just the ego trying to stay on top of the heap by sounding more nondual than the next person. You can see the whole thing as the ego’s need for superiority dressed up in spiritual language.

The irony is thick, because the whole point of nonduality is the dissolution of the one who needs to be right, yet these groups are full of appearances acting out the identity of the one who knows, the one who corrects, the one who negates, the one who can quote the most teachers or deny the most teachings. It becomes a performance, a posturing, a stance, and the stance has to defend itself constantly, so it argues, it nitpicks, it negates, it corrects, it never rests. This is the mind turning conceptual understanding into identity and then defending that identity at all costs.

This one‑upmanship is not clarity, it is insecurity. It is not insight, it is compensation. It is not the collapse of the seeker, it is the seeker reinventing itself as the authority. Once you see that, the whole thing becomes transparent, because you can feel the difference between a pointer arising from seeing and a position arising from mind. One is simple, quiet, grounded. The other is loud, reactive, and always trying to outdo whatever came before it. This is the basic mechanics of spiritual defensiveness playing out in real time.

The tragedy is that real conversations get buried under this noise. Someone genuinely exploring gets shut down by someone performing. Someone asking an honest question gets drowned out by someone trying to sound advanced. Someone sharing something gets corrected by someone who cannot tolerate not being the center of the room. The whole thing becomes a stage for the loudest trying to win a contest they created.

The truth is, none of this has anything to do with nonduality. It is just the same old ego, the same old insecurity, the same old need to be right, wearing a spiritual vocabulary like a costume. The performance continues, the identity defends itself, and the simple clarity that nonduality points to gets lost under layers of conceptual noise.

It is clear how superiority becomes a coping mechanism, or how the mind turns teachings into identity, and how defensiveness masquerades as radicality, because all of this points to the same movement, the same pattern, the same old ego wearing a new mask.

And if there is any doubt for the sincere seeker, just look at who offered a pointer, who offered insight, and then look at who burst into the middle of the conversation only to say that it is wrong. The difference is unmistakable.

What the Mind Makes of It

When offering pointers, I’m not considering every interpretation someone might pull from them… that is always shaped by the conditioning of the reader. Pointers are only pointers, they are never the truth the mind imagines it can grasp.

I’ve seen people who follow the words of Sri Nisargadatta and others who follow Ramana Maharshi, and I’ve heard all the arguments about what their pointers mean. Some say the message is essentially the same, others insist it is not… but it can hardly be argued that either of these two lacked clarity in what they were pointing to. They simply expressed the same no‑thing in different ways, and the mind turns those differences into divisions.

I don’t mind clarifying what I’m saying, but even the best words cannot describe what is being pointed to. And I’m not debating psychology on any of this, because psychology says awareness comes from the mind or the brain, while nonduality is pointing to something entirely different… it says the mind and the brain appear within awareness. These are two different levels of seeing, so there is nothing to argue about. There is more value in a subtractive kind of pointing that shows what it is not… and even that gets pulled into the mind and turned into a belief or a stance imagined by the reader.

Speaking in person has always tended to be the clearest way to share this, because reading seldom leads to any real understanding… the mind grabs the words and runs with them, while direct conversation has a way of cutting through that. Focusing on words, any words including mine, can be misleading when they are misconstrued, because what they point toward is before thought, and once thought tries to describe it the ability to say what it is is already gone. If the words resonate, they resonate, and if they do not then someone else may come through with something that strikes a chord. In any case there is no one here saying anything to anyone there… just appearances moving as they move.

The End of "Getting It"

There’s the idea that “I’m not getting it,” and then the flip side of “I think I’m getting it.” Both are just activity in the mind. You’re never actually out of it, because you are it, and the only thing happening is attention landing on an appearance. Look at the measuring stick being used to decide whether someone is getting something. Seeking inside the dream for an awakened someone goes nowhere. Turning to thoughts, feelings, emotions… all of that is looking in the wrong direction.

It’s only the simple knowing of all of that, the awareness that cannot be thought about and cannot be felt, because every feeling is just a thought interpreting sensation. There is no thinking your way there. There is only what already is… no getting it, no becoming it, no future version of you that arrives. It’s here now, prior to seeking, prior to thought, prior to the one who thinks they’re chasing it. And no, it isn’t exciting, because excitement is just another appearance, and that’s not it.

Looking for happy thoughts and good feelings… looking for anything… is barking up the wrong tree. These are merely what show up, just as pain and misery show up. Any of it may appear at any point, and none of it signifies anything other than the mechanism moving through whatever it’s moving through. Thoughts about enlightenment may show up, a euphoric sense of universal love may wash through the mind and body… fine… but that’s not it. It’s what knows those thoughts and feelings.

If those experiences are focused on, it will seem like “it” is gone the next time life shows up with events the conditioning is set to react to. It may flow smoothly, it may not. Events and circumstances don’t tell the tale. There is only the awareness in which it all appears… the knowingness prior to knowing, the beingness prior to being, the no‑thingness prior to things.

See that, and the search ends, and there’s no need to listen to a pile of opinions about what it is. You can forget all of that and forget all of this, because it’s just words on a screen that can’t say what it is… they can only point.