I was fortunate to have a call with Jim last night. His pointing to non duality is so clear and without contradiction or compromise. I was left absolutely speechless..
He’s actually such a fun and hilarious dude as well. He always has such a laugh with crowd at his talks and it’s just like talking to a totally regular, down to earth guy. But when he gets into the non duality stuff , he also capable of blowing a few minds as he goes along ......
This is a extremely clear interview, probably one of the best I have seen. Listening to the questions and answers may make the dream of separation fall away. Great interview questions.
@@johnmc3862 When someone asks a question about the apparent Jim character, there is no way to answer without going into story. Wherever there are thoughts and words, there is only story. It's all story. Of course there will be apparent contradictions. No story is true. But I've never heard anyone venture into this conceptual territory with as much clarity. Whether or not that is actually useful, is another question.
@@mellowbirds4777 Exactly. Jim is a very clever man. With 30 answers to this hoax in his pocket traveling the world with, making big money. The spiritual industry is big bugs. And Jim gets this. When the questions are sharp, then always say 'there is no you' Or 'apparently'.
I wholeheartedly agree with you! The interviewer never got it. He is not playing. He is stumped. He knows too much. If he gets the message, he will be lying to others if he continues to share the never ending search agenda. The most unique aspect of an interview like this is that the natural frustration arises as the interviewer is unable to let go of everything he thinks he is because he thinks he is there when there is no him or me from his viewpoint. I have a library full of many years of gurus and religious material mental psychological therapies and stuff to include ancient philosophies. It all means absolutely nothing to me now. All that I held dear to me has been dismantled and released. I feel lighter so to speak. I know I am not here but I trust you understand the freedom I express. It is strange to tell people that there is no reason to keep searching for something bigger, better and deeper. Are you in Greece? See ya.🙂
Listening to Jim gives me a picture of a roller coaster on an endless ride, it's such bliss, I am loving it..also it reminds me of Rosemary's baby, when she says...this is not a dream, this is really happening:)))))
"I had the unfortunate calamitous experience of having an awakening when I was younger..." hahaha YEP. Oh, the hopeless spiritual seeker. Great chat, thanks :)
At the center of all this is a beautiful paradox, that of no-self experiencing self. That paradox generates all the other paradoxes and confusions and discussions. But the paradox itself is irreducible, an unsolvable axiom, spinning and shining and generating everything. It is elemental matter.
great talk! From this video I at last realised what it means "there is only now"!!!!!! The illusion of time to appear or seems like we live in lenear from left to right direction or from bottom up. But there is just an appearence of everything, including aging, illnesses, etc. BOdy dies but you remain untouched buy all the theatre. So, we just might enjoy the ride. Really enjoyed it (me that is not even here, obviously)!🥰
I was just going to comment on U.G.! The interviewer reminds me of something U.G. would always say, that every question comes out of answers the person already has. So asking something like “is it wrong” is expecting a particular answer that just confirms their stories about how to find things, such as “well yes it’s wrong because there’s nothing to look for” or “well no because there’s neither right nor wrong.” But the idea that there doesn’t need to be a question at all, much less an answer-which is all Jim says, in a way-can’t be logically or philosophically transmitted.
I think Jim would make his point loud and clear if he would simply remain silent. There's nothing to say and more importantly no one to hear it, after all.
#1 The Sanskrit phrase Maya does not mean suffering. It points to ILLUSION. #2 Jim’s message is beautiful and the teaching can be effective without the putting down of other non-duality teachers which seem to arise in his talks. When one is not familiar with the entirety of a teaching one can say I don’t know instead of assuming. Eckhart Tolle (in this video); Rupert Spira; Mooji; Adyashanti and even Nisargadatha have all been subtly put down in Jim’s talks (other videos). Since there’s No separation and No persons, why would Jim refer to other teachers/people as “THEY” who are looking to REALIZE something... Some of the participants at Jim’s talks/meetings trying to describe other messages do not fully understand the teachings and Jim does not have a full spectrum of these messages/teachers either, so it’s easier to take them out of context. Yes Nisargadatha started with I Am, however the depth of his teachings point to the DISAPPEARANCE of I AM! Although Jim’s method is to deny the illusion continuously, he nevertheless talks about the contraction of energy in the BODY that Is the EGO but denies other teachers the validity of saying anything about the dream. Repeatedly he says Tony Parsons is great but relegates other non-duality teachers thereby subtly creating more judgment and separation. Many teachers rely partially on words to teach and Jim’s words are not more or less superior than Nisargadatha, or Eckhart Tolle or Rupert Spira, etc. This is almost impossible to talk about, words are just words - abstract. The unconditional love that inspires Jim’s message is the same unconditional love that inspires Eckhart Tolle to meet “people” where they are in the dream. Diversity cannot be excluded from absolute freedom. In the end, “The Absolute transcends both knowing and no knowing” - Nisargadatha Maharaj.
Yoye May I just say this. I believe that Jim does not care to discuss other teachers because he has a different slant. He does not want to tell anyone how it is. Letting go of what we think about what we know is a very difficult process. Especially if we spent $300,000 in education to learn stuff. We take ownership of what we think we know which came from other observers, writers or speakers. We get territorial about the stuff we have acquired in our minds. Theology is not argument of facts. It is a disputation of ideas which will never end. Jim has a fresh and simple approach. He is not in competition with anyone. He has a different way of seeing this. Maybe you are ready to share this with people in your area. I know I have been trying here and there and it’s fun for me. When someone gets a piece of it, they grin. Their eyes sparkle. That heals the horror of getting the message. I appreciate you putting a piece of your heart out🙂.
@@carlasimmons5546 How so-the truth is the truth. He needs to get his ego out of the way. Another slightly realized person and there are plenty of them.
I sat with mooji in the early days…this is how he spoke…as time went on he began to speak of a method to understanding ….the since here is you can speak like jim nothing to hold on to …or exhaust the since of me by practice….both have there place
The thing about neo-advaita vs traditional advaita is that not everyone easily gets direct clarity or can take the direct path. So for some it may be better to practice the way outlined in the Upanishads and traditional teachings in order to gain clarity.
The Absolute, or Reality, is regarded as having for sentient beings two aspects. The only aspect perceptible to the unenlightened is the one in which individual phenomena have a separate though purely transitory existence within the limits of space-time. The other aspect is spaceless and timeless; moreover all opposites, all distinctions and 'entities' of every kind, are here seen to be One. Yet neither is this second aspect, alone, the highest fruit of Enlightenment, as many contemplatives suppose; it is only when both aspects are perceived and reconciled that the beholder may be regarded as truly Enlightened. Yet, from that moment, he ceases to be the beholder, for he is conscious of no division between beholding and beheld. This leads to further paradoxes, unless the use of words is abandoned altogether. John Blofeld (in his Translator's Introduction to Huang Po).
There is a phenomenon of personhood FORMATION - the object of "the person experiencing reality" with values, wants, likes, and dislikes etc. This is constantly reinforced (just like repeating the lines of a poem to keep remembering it), by giving into those wants and likes and dislikes etc. And there is the phenomenon of personhood IDENTIFICATION - the linkage of that personhood with the self - a lot like the identification of a reader with a character in a book. It is possible, through meditation, to stop the identification - to feel the personhood but not identifying with it. This is like having a shadow nearby that is full of emotions, likes and dislikes but not "me" You can look at it or ignore it and still relate to reality. This is like depersonalization but unlike the disorder which is uncontrolled and anxiety provoking, it is calming and controllable. It is also possible to stop the reinforcement of the personhood so that it eventually is gone - there is sense of a person, no shadow of a person, "no person is present" It seems to me that Mr Newman has developed the last phenomenon. IMHO either state is of value, since perception and action are not influenced by ego, which causes suffering for the self and others. It is not a question of being more or less enlightened, just differently enlightened.
Jim always travel for free on any airplanes. There is nobody in the seat and nobody on his ID card. The good news is that the airline saves a meal every time as there is nobody to feed. It is a win-win... but not really as there is nobody who wins on Jim's side.
If one wants to think that the meatbag eats it's because the meatbag thought it was born. The meatbag thinks it's eating unless it chooses to see that the eating is an illusion and upon noticing the illusion the meatbag has noticed the all seeing "I" within that does not eat🤗 dwell there eternal now💕
Good subject for an interview. Very clear speaker. Here is a suggestion: You have done a lot of interviews of neo-advaitins (Tony Parsons et al); it would be interesting to hear someone from the more traditional advaita school, and I suggest Swami Sarvapriyananda of the New York Vedanta Society. He also talks about a shift that happens suddenly. He is an excellent speaker and is open to other approaches and also very conversant with online interviewing technologies, Skype, Zoom, etc.
I know that I am aware. I know that something exists rather than nothing. As far as I know I had nothing to do with with all of this amazing diversity of something.
What this discussion could benefit from is an accessible explanation. To state that what is happening is boundless is to say that there is no inherent meaning, motive, or rules that govern existence and expansion of what is. It is free to BE whatever emerges and what emerges is THIS. It is not bound by morals, laws, emotion, or intention. All that exists is perfectly expressive and is obligated to nothing. Furthermore it does not answer to the limited capacity of human beings.
Furthermore, the universe has manifested as human being with capacity to engineer an elaborate game with rules of engagement. One who arrives at this tate of being expressed by the interviewee comprehends this game. That is the premise behind the term "illusion".
All of the videos of Jim (on TH-cam) cannot be commented (turned off). And all of his talks resume as "there is nothing", "nothing happens", "there is nothing to do", etc. So I cannot understand how he has an audience?
Individualism as a construct that emerged through industrial capitalism is around 300 years old as an ideology and to that end humans adapt to the end of the individual as emergent forms of capitalism sublimate earlier forms of individualism. What seems to occur within the non-dualism discourse is a form of simulated individualism that instantiates copies through virtual forms to the point that the singularity in the form of artificial general intelligence approaches is just mind stuff in general and so functions as a central cultural repository of data that can be harvested by persons who ostensibly appear as individual who are an instance of open consciousness, or if closed, then zombie or person absent of qualitative states of consciousness.
If this is neo-advaita, what it lacks is the message “one/all is deathless”. Neo-advaita gives the impression it focuses only on certain aspects of other spiritual nondual teachings. In my own words (and based on my own indescribable experience) “we are reality, totally uncaused (unborn), timeless, even space is not necessary, deathless, without a true purpose because everything of importance has already been achieved timelessly (eternity) ago.”. From that insight comes the derivative “expresssions” of neo advaita teachers - is my guess - that what appears is merely a happening. While that may be “true”, they don’t offer a really liberating message, is simply my impression from this interview. But, listening to a message like this could be helpful to some people. It is indeed all just part of a show, this interview or what all the other teachers have said. So there is a lot of overlap with Advaita vedanta, but it is explicitly lacking the message (or an equal message) of “you/we are all reality”. Go the very fact or the experience (if you prefer that word) that “I exist”. See its emptiness, stay there, remind yourself of that until you one day merge with Reality. That is one of the infinite ways to reach enlightenment, it is another (mere) description of a path or a practice that is really no path or practice. Peace (in silence) (is another way) 😊
This is about the man who thinks he is in a desert running towards a pool of water, when on jumping in it discovering that not only the pool, but he as well is a fata morgana and both turn into the sand they always were.
@stabilobowski clever. My statement has a context though. That is to point out the dogma of ‚nobody‘. It is inevitably an ideological stance. You just can’t avoid that happening.
@stabilobowski it’s interesting that the mind will use this wprd game to support its thesis (I am nothing ) but when challenged will disparage the same word game.
@stabilobowski I find it personally a very dull scene. All this jargon and there is something dead about it. I can’t put my finger on it but it seems like some teachers and practitioners have made an identity of this ‚nothing ‚ business and walk around with this heavy weight on them. But it’s supposed to be nothing. ! Surely that should be lighter. Seems all a bit angsty and heady to me. But obvs some people must be getting something out of it because it’s all the rage.
it's so funny how the person always wants something for its own temporary satisfaction not even knowing how annoying they become in the process. Like an addict not getting any fixing. I don't know how Jim stays so calm :) I guess after so many talks he is used to it. He is like, even before sitting down: got no fuckin' stuff for you, apparently you can go and get it from somewhere else.
I love all Jim's stuff. He basically always starts with: "There is only what is. This is what you thought you were seeking. And btw there is no you." And then spends the next hour repeating the same simple message again and again because whoever heard it wants to make a narrative and a story out of it when there isn't one.
There is the appearance of illusion of a me; an experience with the label "me". But ther is no "one" "having" the experience. The experience simply is.
The trick is getting past you don't exist as an individual, all these other questions on non dual are instantly answered once you get that. No I have not had the veil fall away. Just my intuition.
I m wondering why European and American non duality teachers seems not to know or say anything about mysticism? Do have to be born in India to touch mysticism? :)
It is all true what Jim says, except when he claims it is radical or different than what is already been said about this. Advaita Vedanta and Zen are pointing to exactly the same truth and wholeness. Ramana Maharshi, Papaji, Nisargadatta, Mooji, Eckhart Tolle, to name but a few that have preceeded Jim, are pointing to exactly the same. If he denies (or avoids to be clear about) that, he is misinformed or lost in translation. The only thing radical about Jims (and Tony Parsons) message is the phrasing, the form of his suggestions, not what he says, but how. He found a vocabulaire that is trying to be as Non-dual as possible to the extend that it is almost impossible to talk with him without misunderstanding. It can however be a pointer in itself as it emphasises the duality of knowing, thinking and talking itself. But this too is not a new insight and it is pointed to by all the masters I mentioned.
thats because Tolle and Advaita leave a person full of being (love) but non-duality people gave up seeking a bit to early, in my humble opinion. this is a godless version
And another thing. He said in another video that the me views itself as a cause and that impression dies in liberation. But surely there would still be a way to realise that this body and thoughts can learn something new and not repeat a previous mistake for example. So there’s something caused by the lack of information that will change upon the gaining of new information. Not that I am a causeless cause but just that the greater information will have different consequences than the lesser information will or incorrect information. I’m not talking about having free will here just that cause makes sense. How can there not be an interaction between aspects of the appearance that can be reasonably referred to as causality. I suppose in a sense everything ultimately causes everything else in one singular interaction of all aspects of reality but we can surely point to a local aspect of that and say that’s part of the causal network of all aspects.
The appearance of causality is not denied, but it being - real - is denied. The 'me' has no place in this apparent causality whatsoever, in stark contrast to what the dream the me lives in seems to suggest. The me sees itself as a causeless cause that is able to make a completely independent choice. There's no 'I' present that can distinguish between what is a mistake or not, nor to choose whether to make the mistake again, or not. This does not exclude the possibility for apparant brainfunction and the ability to adapt or 'learn'.
curiosity saved the cat Well I agree that the idea of a central causeless cause is none sense. It’s all part of the whole causal network of everything that appears. But he has suggested that causality in any sense is not -real- as you say but what can that mean? The appearances happen in an ordered way and causality is a good way to explain that. Sure in the absolute sense I’m an idealist so I don’t buy materialism and I say everything is ultimately the manifest aspect of a timeless and formless energy. But I think that when this energy meets its own activity that creates a causality. Sure it’s not causality between material objects that have real positions in space but a causal activity it must be to explain the order and reliability of the appearance.
@@mellowbirds4777 As I see it, Jim Newman and for example Tony Parsons are not trying to explain the laws of physics as they appear. Quite the contrary. The suggestion is that only the appearance seems to be knowable, with a strong emphasis on 'seems to be'. Even causality only makes sense as long as you don't ask to many questions, as is true for all that seems to be known by the 'I'. What remains when causality is seen as an appearance, rather than the absolute truth, is a complete unknowable mystery. Even saying everything is ultimately the manifest aspect of a timeless and formless energy, creates the suggestion of duality between formless energy and the manifestation of it. This division is a form of knowing. It may lead to the false premise that order and reliability is an absolute truth, whereas that also is merely an appearance. It (to me) sounds like an attempt of a 'me' trying to comprehend that which can't be comprehended. Causality suggest 'what is' is going somewhere, and consists of different parts or aspects that interact with each other. There is only what is, there's nowhere for it to go, there's nothing real to interact. Only a world that is seen as real requires an explanation. An appearance just is what it is. (Including every attempt to 'get it') P.S. Physics, quantum physics, astronomy, biology etc. are fascinating topics to investigate. However, it can only deepen the mystery. When curiosity (asking questions) stops happening, either the dream state of knowing remains, or mystery is seen. Any form of conceptual knowing and truth are mutually exclusive, except within the dream of a 'me'.
curiosity saved the cat Yes I have to say I agree with most of what you say. Immanuel Kant said “all knowledge is experience bound. We cannot speak of the absolute.” For our discussion substitute appearance for experience. And certainly any concept can be questioned to death. Philosophy leads us to see that the absolute nature of this is unknowable. I agree my language was a bit dualistic. I agree that the appearances simply are the absolute. There is nothing else but the no thing. It is so mysterious and will remain a mystery. So generally yes to all you said but let’s be careful not to believe anything these guys say or allow them any authority in our lives. Let’s not talk like them. Let’s not walk like them. I realise there’s no choice here but I don’t put this forward as if I’ve chosen it nor that anyone can choose to follow it. There is simply the message of caution which may be respond to. Let’s not act as though these people or anything they say has any worth. If this idea upsets you at all then I suggest you’ve become deeply devoted. Nice talking.
@UCUs_AwOnr1FyoZLLzZ8cUEg Spot on! No authority regarding to mystery is possible. These guys know nothing ;) All language is by definition dualistic and can be misinterpreted at any time, so what you said is just as true/false as what I said. There was no intention here to teach in anyway, it was just a response to a person with similar a interest so it seems. Nice talking indeed!
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 73 | คู่เอก "วรพล vs พันฤทธิ์"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/rrOljlqse3A/mqdefault.jpg)
- You must be fun at parties.
- There is no party.
LOL!!!!!
Actually there is only partying but no one attends
@@TheRealHipPriest hahah true
@@TheRealHipPriest there is an apparent party
Awesome! :)
I was fortunate to have a call with Jim last night. His pointing to non duality is so clear and without contradiction or compromise. I was left absolutely speechless..
For once, "I" shut up =D
Jim sounds to me like the clearest, friendliest and most coherent expression of this. Thanks for a great interview also.
He’s actually such a fun and hilarious dude as well. He always has such a laugh with crowd at his talks and it’s just like talking to a totally regular, down to earth guy. But when he gets into the non duality stuff , he also capable of blowing a few minds as he goes along ......
You meant that?
‘This’ is his gig.
@@particleconfig.8935 Yeah absolutely. I think he's great.
"friendliest and most coherent expression of this"
What is "this"?? Is this the religion of "this"?
Lol...
This is a extremely clear interview, probably one of the best I have seen. Listening to the questions and answers may make the dream of separation fall away. Great interview questions.
I have listened to this interview ten times in the past five days...
Thanks to Patrick for his courageous questioning.
The reason why this is an excellent interview is because of the questions. Thanks for that.
Absolutely wonderful! Jim is always clear as a bell. Thanks!
sue gibson
Yes but that doesn’t mean there’s any honesty to him or what he says.
Jim contradicts himself sometimes for sure. He briefly tells about his past and says there’s no story.
@@johnmc3862 When someone asks a question about the apparent Jim character, there is no way to answer without going into story. Wherever there are thoughts and words, there is only story. It's all story. Of course there will be apparent contradictions. No story is true. But I've never heard anyone venture into this conceptual territory with as much clarity. Whether or not that is actually useful, is another question.
@@mellowbirds4777 Exactly. Jim is a very clever man. With 30 answers to this hoax in his pocket traveling the world with, making big money. The spiritual industry is big bugs. And Jim gets this. When the questions are sharp, then always say 'there is no you' Or 'apparently'.
Jim cracking up at 32:30 when he mentions “applied nonduality” is gold 😆❤️. Thank you for this wonderful interview!
I think that these interviews are even better than the meetings. Even cooler...
I wholeheartedly agree with you! The interviewer never got it. He is not playing. He is stumped. He knows too much. If he gets the message, he will be lying to others if he continues to share the never ending search agenda. The most unique aspect of an interview like this is that the natural frustration arises as the interviewer is unable to let go of everything he thinks he is because he thinks he is there when there is no him or me from his viewpoint. I have a library full of many years of gurus and religious material mental psychological therapies and stuff to include ancient philosophies. It all means absolutely nothing to me now. All that I held dear to me has been dismantled and released. I feel lighter so to speak. I know I am not here but I trust you understand the freedom I express. It is strange to tell people that there is no reason to keep searching for something bigger, better and deeper. Are you in Greece? See ya.🙂
@@ArtOfHealth Yes, I am in Greece. Even your comment is very 'helpful'. Thank you.🙂
Listening to Jim gives me a picture of a roller coaster on an endless ride, it's such bliss, I am loving it..also it reminds me of Rosemary's baby, when she says...this is not a dream, this is really happening:)))))
Freedom speaking directly, simply, transparently and uncompromisingly...thank you.
It doesn't get better than this!
"I had the unfortunate calamitous experience of having an awakening when I was younger..." hahaha YEP. Oh, the hopeless spiritual seeker. Great chat, thanks :)
Thanks for the interview!
Top Patrick! Ik geef trainingen en leer superveel van jouw eerlijke vermogen om 'erbij' te blijven in de podcasts. Thanx en ga alsjeblieft door!
Is it just me who feels peace and a deep inner silence when watching Jim's videos?
Understanding the transparent fabricated persona can often relax the body.
At the center of all this is a beautiful paradox, that of no-self experiencing self. That paradox generates all the other paradoxes and confusions and discussions. But the paradox itself is irreducible, an unsolvable axiom, spinning and shining and generating everything. It is elemental matter.
Love love that arrow sign! 😂 thanks, lovely interview.
Thank "you" and thanks to, "Jim". Great talk.
great talk! From this video I at last realised what it means "there is only now"!!!!!! The illusion of time to appear or seems like we live in lenear from left to right direction or from bottom up. But there is just an appearence of everything, including aging, illnesses, etc. BOdy dies but you remain untouched buy all the theatre. So, we just might enjoy the ride. Really enjoyed it (me that is not even here, obviously)!🥰
Thank you for your perceptive comment.
Thanks for posting🙂👍
Wonderful intellectual grasp of eternal Truth!
Love is all,
Al
Loved this interview!
great interview very clear and so obvious!!!
This was amazing! Clarity pointing to nothing. Illuminating,
Simplicity pisses people off❤
You mean sophistry.
Thanks for that ❤❤
Wonderful ! Jim is another softspoken u.g.
Yeah. U.G. slaughtered the upanishads
I was just going to comment on U.G.! The interviewer reminds me of something U.G. would always say, that every question comes out of answers the person already has. So asking something like “is it wrong” is expecting a particular answer that just confirms their stories about how to find things, such as “well yes it’s wrong because there’s nothing to look for” or “well no because there’s neither right nor wrong.” But the idea that there doesn’t need to be a question at all, much less an answer-which is all Jim says, in a way-can’t be logically or philosophically transmitted.
There is no doer of actions or reaper of consequences - Ashtavakra Gita
Amazing, thank you !
Probably the second best interview with the duality form (illusion) that’s Jim :)
The best one being the one with Alan Steinfeld
I think Jim would make his point loud and clear if he would simply remain silent. There's nothing to say and more importantly no one to hear it, after all.
Jim is brilliant!
The Search Is Over. Smile.
"Its a real experience" followed by " Its a dream, its not happening"
thanks. great talk.
One of the rare videos of him with good sound.
”Hope springs eternal!”
The body dos'nt feel pain without conciousness,so the body dos'nt feel pain .
100 percent this is where I am❤️
#1 The Sanskrit phrase Maya does not mean suffering. It points to ILLUSION.
#2 Jim’s message is beautiful and the teaching can be effective without the putting down of other non-duality teachers which seem to arise in his talks. When one is not familiar with the entirety of a teaching one can say I don’t know instead of assuming. Eckhart Tolle (in this video); Rupert Spira; Mooji; Adyashanti and even Nisargadatha have all been subtly put down in Jim’s talks (other videos).
Since there’s No separation and No persons, why would Jim refer to other teachers/people as “THEY” who are looking to REALIZE something...
Some of the participants at Jim’s talks/meetings trying to describe other messages do not fully understand the teachings and Jim does not have a full spectrum of these messages/teachers either, so it’s easier to take them out of context. Yes Nisargadatha started with I Am, however the depth of his teachings point to the DISAPPEARANCE of I AM!
Although Jim’s method is to deny the illusion continuously, he nevertheless talks about the contraction of energy in the BODY that Is the EGO but denies other teachers the validity of saying anything about the dream. Repeatedly he says Tony Parsons is great but relegates other non-duality teachers thereby subtly creating more judgment and separation.
Many teachers rely partially on words to teach and Jim’s words are not more or less superior than Nisargadatha, or Eckhart Tolle or Rupert Spira, etc. This is almost impossible to talk about, words are just words - abstract. The unconditional love that inspires Jim’s message is the same unconditional love that inspires Eckhart Tolle to meet “people” where they are in the dream. Diversity cannot be excluded from absolute freedom. In the end, “The Absolute transcends both knowing and no knowing” - Nisargadatha Maharaj.
Yoye May I just say this. I believe that Jim does not care to discuss other teachers because he has a different slant. He does not want to tell anyone how it is. Letting go of what we think about what we know is a very difficult process. Especially if we spent $300,000 in education to learn stuff. We take ownership of what we think we know which came from other observers, writers or speakers. We get territorial about the stuff we have acquired in our minds. Theology is not argument of facts. It is a disputation of ideas which will never end. Jim has a fresh and simple approach. He is not in competition with anyone. He has a different way of seeing this. Maybe you are ready to share this with people in your area. I know I have been trying here and there and it’s fun for me. When someone gets a piece of it, they grin. Their eyes sparkle. That heals the horror of getting the message. I appreciate you putting a piece of your heart out🙂.
Well said. This guy and Parsons also have a certain smugness to them. Just answer the questions like a normal person without the superiority trip.
This message is different from teachers and teachings.
@@carlasimmons5546 How so-the truth is the truth. He needs to get his ego out of the way. Another slightly realized person and there are plenty of them.
The last bit you quoted is intriguing. Reminds me of a theme in the Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch.
Jim Newman “ There isn’t a me!” 🤩😂pretty clear 💥
There is no place to go
There is no thing to see
There is no thing to feel
There is no thing to be
I sat with mooji in the early days…this is how he spoke…as time went on he began to speak of a method to understanding ….the since here is you can speak like jim nothing to hold on to …or exhaust the since of me by practice….both have there place
Thanks this was so funny and good. Patrik nobody good job!!😀🥰💛
Explaining the psychosomatic tension in the body is a terribly useful point.
"What needs to happen for this to be what it is?"
Nothing! It's already😎🙏
keep coming back to this blissful and terrifying message : )))))
and the science of the first person ( non person)
OMG Clean Sound on this one.
Gorgeous!
The thing about neo-advaita vs traditional advaita is that not everyone easily gets direct clarity or can take the direct path. So for some it may be better to practice the way outlined in the Upanishads and traditional teachings in order to gain clarity.
Search for Rupert Spira.
Who needs clarity? It’s not a mental exercise.
The Absolute, or Reality, is regarded as having for sentient beings two aspects. The only aspect perceptible to the unenlightened is the one in which individual phenomena have a separate though purely transitory existence within the limits of space-time. The other aspect is spaceless and timeless; moreover all opposites, all distinctions and 'entities' of every kind, are here seen to be One. Yet neither is this second aspect, alone, the highest fruit of Enlightenment, as many contemplatives suppose; it is only when both aspects are perceived and reconciled that the beholder may be regarded as truly Enlightened. Yet, from that moment, he ceases to be the beholder, for he is conscious of no division between beholding and beheld. This leads to further paradoxes, unless the use of words is abandoned altogether. John Blofeld (in his Translator's Introduction to Huang Po).
He's absolutely sure of his insanity!
GREAT!!!!
My big bang experience was outside of space-time in no-where, no-when.
There is a phenomenon of personhood FORMATION - the object of "the person experiencing reality" with values, wants, likes, and dislikes etc. This is constantly reinforced (just like repeating the lines of a poem to keep remembering it), by giving into those wants and likes and dislikes etc.
And there is the phenomenon of personhood IDENTIFICATION - the linkage of that personhood with the self - a lot like the identification of a reader with a character in a book.
It is possible, through meditation, to stop the identification - to feel the personhood but not identifying with it. This is like having a shadow nearby that is full of emotions, likes and dislikes but not "me" You can look at it or ignore it and still relate to reality. This is like depersonalization but unlike the disorder which is uncontrolled and anxiety provoking, it is calming and controllable.
It is also possible to stop the reinforcement of the personhood so that it eventually is gone - there is sense of a person, no shadow of a person, "no person is present"
It seems to me that Mr Newman has developed the last phenomenon. IMHO either state is of value, since perception and action are not influenced by ego, which causes suffering for the self and others. It is not a question of being more or less enlightened, just differently enlightened.
Jim always travel for free on any airplanes. There is nobody in the seat and nobody on his ID card. The good news is that the airline saves a meal every time as there is nobody to feed. It is a win-win... but not really as there is nobody who wins on Jim's side.
So its just a win-?
The Meatbag eats and digest's.
Not *you* ;-)
That is funny at so many levels
Apparently there is a body to feed lols
If one wants to think that the meatbag eats it's because the meatbag thought it was born. The meatbag thinks it's eating unless it chooses to see that the eating is an illusion and upon noticing the illusion the meatbag has noticed the all seeing "I" within that does not eat🤗 dwell there eternal now💕
Can please explain Jim comment about this meeting at 21:30
My only question is if the me is no longer there then how would what ever is there know anything is happening
Good subject for an interview. Very clear speaker.
Here is a suggestion: You have done a lot of interviews of neo-advaitins (Tony Parsons et al); it would be interesting to hear someone from the more traditional advaita school, and I suggest Swami Sarvapriyananda of the New York Vedanta Society. He also talks about a shift that happens suddenly. He is an excellent speaker and is open to other approaches and also very conversant with online interviewing technologies, Skype, Zoom, etc.
you realise there is no inherent self when you realise there is no inherent self to realise it
Marvelous!
wow!
That's nonsense of the highest order.
@@cosmofox yes even free will is an illusion
@@robertjsmith I bow down to your parroted bullsht beliefs.
I know that I am aware. I know that something exists rather than nothing. As far as I know I had nothing to do with with all of this amazing diversity of something.
Rareness is quite ordinary
What this discussion could benefit from is an accessible explanation. To state that what is happening is boundless is to say that there is no inherent meaning, motive, or rules that govern existence and expansion of what is. It is free to BE whatever emerges and what emerges is THIS. It is not bound by morals, laws, emotion, or intention. All that exists is perfectly expressive and is obligated to nothing. Furthermore it does not answer to the limited capacity of human beings.
Furthermore, the universe has manifested as human being with capacity to engineer an elaborate game with rules of engagement. One who arrives at this tate of being expressed by the interviewee comprehends this game. That is the premise behind the term "illusion".
Likeable chap
Jim ist der beste! Es ist einfach so😃
Thanks for no one. Thanks.
All of the videos of Jim (on TH-cam) cannot be commented (turned off). And all of his talks resume as "there is nothing", "nothing happens", "there is nothing to do", etc. So I cannot understand how he has an audience?
OP, after watching full interview, I have to ask - did "you" get the message? Or did the message got "you"?
Ofcourse, it always gets ‘me’ 😀
If Jims wife describe him before the ego collapsing, that would be interesting
one of the few straight ones imo
Does anybody know or have a link to the video they were discussing about him referencing Mooji?
Not a lottery because nobody wins. Love it!
I do not think that i can handle that in my experiencing
Holy 💩
Yup! Every thing is holy!
❤️
I think I understand two moments, what
is and isn’t( not a paradox, yes
Tradução não está funcionando.
❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️
How could anybody be amazing. When there is nobody hummm?
Being amazing happens for no one.
I suspect few egos die from listening to this. Probably as few as from any other teaching. LOL.
Individualism as a construct that emerged through industrial capitalism is around 300 years old as an ideology and to that end humans adapt to the end of the individual as emergent forms of capitalism sublimate earlier forms of individualism. What seems to occur within the non-dualism discourse is a form of simulated individualism that instantiates copies through virtual forms to the point that the singularity in the form of artificial general intelligence approaches is just mind stuff in general and so functions as a central cultural repository of data that can be harvested by persons who ostensibly appear as individual who are an instance of open consciousness, or if closed, then zombie or person absent of qualitative states of consciousness.
pity about the sound
Pity about your attitude 😢
My second question is why talk about what is not real if there is nothing to gain or nothing to prove or nothing to be on nothing to see
If this is neo-advaita, what it lacks is the message “one/all is deathless”. Neo-advaita gives the impression it focuses only on certain aspects of other spiritual nondual teachings. In my own words (and based on my own indescribable experience) “we are reality, totally uncaused (unborn), timeless, even space is not necessary, deathless, without a true purpose because everything of importance has already been achieved timelessly (eternity) ago.”. From that insight comes the derivative “expresssions” of neo advaita teachers - is my guess - that what appears is merely a happening. While that may be “true”, they don’t offer a really liberating message, is simply my impression from this interview. But, listening to a message like this could be helpful to some people. It is indeed all just part of a show, this interview or what all the other teachers have said. So there is a lot of overlap with Advaita vedanta, but it is explicitly lacking the message (or an equal message) of “you/we are all reality”. Go the very fact or the experience (if you prefer that word) that “I exist”. See its emptiness, stay there, remind yourself of that until you one day merge with Reality. That is one of the infinite ways to reach enlightenment, it is another (mere) description of a path or a practice that is really no path or practice. Peace (in silence) (is another way) 😊
Like 👍🏻
Is this a meeting, or is nobody there?
This is about the man who thinks he is in a desert running towards a pool of water, when on jumping in it discovering that not only the pool, but he as well is a fata morgana and both turn into the sand they always were.
The second you try to explain what it is, it’s exactly what it isn’t 🤷♂️
40:05 nice distinction
Now all of a sudde there IS a crowd... Arrhh !
Nothing is another idea. Nobody is another idea.
@stabilobowski clever. My statement has a context though. That is to point out the dogma of ‚nobody‘. It is inevitably an ideological stance. You just can’t avoid that happening.
@stabilobowski it’s interesting that the mind will use this wprd game to support its thesis (I am nothing ) but when challenged will disparage the same word game.
@stabilobowski I find it personally a very dull scene. All this jargon and there is something dead about it. I can’t put my finger on it but it seems like some teachers and practitioners have made an identity of this ‚nothing ‚ business and walk around with this heavy weight on them. But it’s supposed to be nothing. ! Surely that should be lighter. Seems all a bit angsty and heady to me. But obvs some people must be getting something out of it because it’s all the rage.
@stabilobowski Good points well made.
it's so funny how the person always wants something for its own temporary satisfaction not even knowing how annoying they become in the process. Like an addict not getting any fixing. I don't know how Jim stays so calm :) I guess after so many talks he is used to it. He is like, even before sitting down: got no fuckin' stuff for you, apparently you can go and get it from somewhere else.
There already are many, many teachers, saviors and coaches to give a seeker "stuff" to fill up their needy ego/separate self.
I love all Jim's stuff. He basically always starts with: "There is only what is. This is what you thought you were seeking. And btw there is no you." And then spends the next hour repeating the same simple message again and again because whoever heard it wants to make a narrative and a story out of it when there isn't one.
The green no me movment
Maya menas ILLUSION….
so theres no me's but theres people who jeff can sometimes detect an "illusory" me in
there is no real contrast , so this question has no aswer. or... question and answer are the same no-thing. No sense appearing as virtual sense.
There is the appearance of illusion of a me; an experience with the label "me". But ther is no "one" "having" the experience. The experience simply is.
The trick is getting past you don't exist as an individual, all these other questions on non dual are instantly answered once you get that. No I have not had the veil fall away. Just my intuition.
You do exist.
I m wondering why European and American non duality teachers seems not to know or say anything about mysticism? Do have to be born in India to touch mysticism? :)
It is all true what Jim says, except when he claims it is radical or different than what is already been said about this. Advaita Vedanta and Zen are pointing to exactly the same truth and wholeness. Ramana Maharshi, Papaji, Nisargadatta, Mooji, Eckhart Tolle, to name but a few that have preceeded Jim, are pointing to exactly the same. If he denies (or avoids to be clear about) that, he is misinformed or lost in translation. The only thing radical about Jims (and Tony Parsons) message is the phrasing, the form of his suggestions, not what he says, but how. He found a vocabulaire that is trying to be as Non-dual as possible to the extend that it is almost impossible to talk with him without misunderstanding. It can however be a pointer in itself as it emphasises the duality of knowing, thinking and talking itself. But this too is not a new insight and it is pointed to by all the masters I mentioned.
I'm not sure I've seen him claim to be saying anything radical or different or new.
thats because Tolle and Advaita leave a person full of being (love) but non-duality people gave up seeking a bit to early, in my humble opinion. this is a godless version
And another thing. He said in another video that the me views itself as a cause and that impression dies in liberation.
But surely there would still be a way to realise that this body and thoughts can learn something new and not repeat a previous mistake for example. So there’s something caused by the lack of information that will change upon the gaining of new information. Not that I am a causeless cause but just that the greater information will have different consequences than the lesser information will or incorrect information. I’m not talking about having free will here just that cause makes sense.
How can there not be an interaction between aspects of the appearance that can be reasonably referred to as causality.
I suppose in a sense everything ultimately causes everything else in one singular interaction of all aspects of reality but we can surely point to a local aspect of that and say that’s part of the causal network of all aspects.
The appearance of causality is not denied, but it being - real - is denied. The 'me' has no place in this apparent causality whatsoever, in stark contrast to what the dream the me lives in seems to suggest. The me sees itself as a causeless cause that is able to make a completely independent choice. There's no 'I' present that can distinguish between what is a mistake or not, nor to choose whether to make the mistake again, or not. This does not exclude the possibility for apparant brainfunction and the ability to adapt or 'learn'.
curiosity saved the cat
Well I agree that the idea of a central causeless cause is none sense. It’s all part of the whole causal network of everything that appears. But he has suggested that causality in any sense is not -real- as you say but what can that mean? The appearances happen in an ordered way and causality is a good way to explain that.
Sure in the absolute sense I’m an idealist so I don’t buy materialism and I say everything is ultimately the manifest aspect of a timeless and formless energy. But I think that when this energy meets its own activity that creates a causality.
Sure it’s not causality between material objects that have real positions in space but a causal activity it must be to explain the order and reliability of the appearance.
@@mellowbirds4777 As I see it, Jim Newman and for example Tony Parsons are not trying to explain the laws of physics as they appear. Quite the contrary. The suggestion is that only the appearance seems to be knowable, with a strong emphasis on 'seems to be'. Even causality only makes sense as long as you don't ask to many questions, as is true for all that seems to be known by the 'I'.
What remains when causality is seen as an appearance, rather than the absolute truth, is a complete unknowable mystery. Even saying everything is ultimately the manifest aspect of a timeless and formless energy, creates the suggestion of duality between formless energy and the manifestation of it. This division is a form of knowing. It may lead to the false premise that order and reliability is an absolute truth, whereas that also is merely an appearance. It (to me) sounds like an attempt of a 'me' trying to comprehend that which can't be comprehended.
Causality suggest 'what is' is going somewhere, and consists of different parts or aspects that interact with each other. There is only what is, there's nowhere for it to go, there's nothing real to interact.
Only a world that is seen as real requires an explanation. An appearance just is what it is. (Including every attempt to 'get it')
P.S. Physics, quantum physics, astronomy, biology etc. are fascinating topics to investigate. However, it can only deepen the mystery. When curiosity (asking questions) stops happening, either the dream state of knowing remains, or mystery is seen. Any form of conceptual knowing and truth are mutually exclusive, except within the dream of a 'me'.
curiosity saved the cat
Yes I have to say I agree with most of what you say.
Immanuel Kant said “all knowledge is experience bound. We cannot speak of the absolute.” For our discussion substitute appearance for experience.
And certainly any concept can be questioned to death. Philosophy leads us to see that the absolute nature of this is unknowable.
I agree my language was a bit dualistic. I agree that the appearances simply are the absolute. There is nothing else but the no thing. It is so mysterious and will remain a mystery.
So generally yes to all you said but let’s be careful not to believe anything these guys say or allow them any authority in our lives. Let’s not talk like them. Let’s not walk like them. I realise there’s no choice here but I don’t put this forward as if I’ve chosen it nor that anyone can choose to follow it. There is simply the message of caution which may be respond to.
Let’s not act as though these people or anything they say has any worth.
If this idea upsets you at all then I suggest you’ve become deeply devoted.
Nice talking.
@UCUs_AwOnr1FyoZLLzZ8cUEg Spot on! No authority regarding to mystery is possible. These guys know nothing ;) All language is by definition dualistic and can be misinterpreted at any time, so what you said is just as true/false as what I said. There was no intention here to teach in anyway, it was just a response to a person with similar a interest so it seems.
Nice talking indeed!
Hey man what's happening?
busheybushdawg This!😉
@@ArtOfHealth Simply this!
Yes