Wait, plain version: on a normal day, what would you notice that's different between duality with self realisation and the ego state?
Zero state.
Thought
Thought
Wait, plain version: on a normal day, what would you notice that's different between duality with self realisation and the ego state?
Post content
Zero state = nothing, void, emptiness.
We all have idea of what void emptiness or nothing is. That idea also drops in zero because zero means zero. It cannot be seen it cannot do anything or it simply cannot exsist. It means absence of anything.
In simple terms in zero state everything is absence. Absence of anything is the proof of zero state.
How to know that Oneness is zero state? Because when you try to look and try to find out the essence of experiences and experiencer you will able to find nothing. Here you can see absence right? This absence of both is known as zero state.
From this absence created a pure infinite potential that pure potential is oneness the state where experiencer and experiences become one. Means you cannot find any difference between or any distance between the experiencer and experiences.
After this comes duality. This duality is also know as maya a.k.a illusion.
Why duality called illusion because it seperate the actual way exsistence is exsisting. The actual way exsistence is exsisting is based on oneness.
So it is more like this for the students of spirituality.
Zero state ( aagyata - state of not knowing).
↓
State of oneness. ( Dissolve of experiences and experiencer, simply can't able to find any distance or difference between experience and experiencer)
Here spirituality ends at stage of oneness because oneness and zero state are one thing they are not something different.
↓
State of duality ( awareness of self i.e. - experiencer and experiences knowledge)
↓
State of ignorance or pure illusion. ( This is state of ego - I, me, mine, my )
The above state of duality isn't illusion if you have self realisation. But in state of ignorance you are completely under control of illusion. In duality state, illusion is still there but you understand illusion but in this state you are under control of illusion.
So this is what spirituality journey looks like.
Zero state → Oneness state → Duality state → state of ignorance i.e. ego state.
Zero state - It is state of not knowing. Because now you cannot find anything. Like you can find essence of ocean, river, rain is water right? But when ask what is essence of water? You cannot able to find it right? If some smart one says no, essence of water can be molecules or then atoms then vibrations then something. Ask them what is the end of all essence? Now you could see right? End of all essence is zero.
Similarly when you cannot find essence of oneness that state is known as state of aagyata or zero state. You can see that oneness is also same as zero state. A bit different but yeah mostly same.
Thoughts
-
Wait, plain version: on a normal day, what would you notice that's different between duality with self realisation and the ego state?
-
Not knowing first. Yes 👌
-
The water step is where I get off. Ocean, water, molecules, atoms, fields, and then we run out of answers. Not having found the bottom is a fact about us, not about the bottom. Calling that gap zero turns a hole in what we know into a finding about existence.
-
Your water example is very close to what Nagarjuna did with sunyata. He also kept looking for the essence of a thing and never hit bottom.
Where he landed is a little different though: emptiness meant empty of a fixed core, not a zero sitting under everything. My guess is your map and his agree for most of the road and split at the last step.
-
The arrow running from zero down to the ego state makes me think of how most people would draw it the other way round, with ego at the start and something bigger at the end. I bet the direction of that arrow gets more argument here than any single stage does. Thanks for putting it down as a list, it made it easy to follow!
Related posts
-
Is therapy just confession with the theology stripped out?
One of the funniest things about secular modern culture is watching people reinvent Christianity piece by piece while acting intellectually superior the entire time. People abandoned confession and now pay someone $240 plus taxes an hour to listen to them describe their guilt in a softly lit room. They abandoned sin and replaced it with "unprocessed trauma." They abandoned repentance and replaced it with "doing the work." They abandoned examination of conscience and replaced it with journaling…
-
Why does Silicon Valley talk about death like it's a software bug?
One of the clearest signs that modern secular elite culture is uneasy about death is how Silicon Valley talks about it. The human body is treated like legacy hardware waiting for an upgrade. In place of acceptance, you get optimization: longevity startups, cryonics, extreme biohacking, and constant speculation about whether enough computation and biotech might eventually defeat death itself. Tech billionaires talk with pride about potentially transferring their consciousness to a computer, as…
-
Do conservatives actually own the Church?
I am tired of conservatives acting like they own the Church. They do not. The Church is older than the political right, older than trad nostalgia, older than the American culture war, and older than the faction that keeps trying to turn its own instincts into orthodoxy. If you look at Christian history instead of clinging to one preferred snapshot of it, the record points the other way.
-
Does atheism make you more rational, or just leave a void you fill badly?
One of the common atheist temptations is to confuse unbelief with clarity, to assume that religion is the irrational part, so removing religion must leave behind a cleaner and more rational human being. But human beings do not work that way, human beings operate through beliefs, emotions... We do not stop wanting ritual, purity, moral tribe, sense of sacredness or transcendent meaning just because we stop using religious language for those desires.
-
Is Christ's message eternal, but never meant to be read literally?
Christians rightly say that the truth revealed in Christ is not temporary, but rather eternal. That is true, but it does not mean literalism and it does not mean that we are to drop interpretation. The mistake comes when some believers quietly turn that into a different claim: because the truth is eternal, every biblical utterance should be treated as though it arrived outside history and therefore needs no interpretation any longer, but rather has to be taken literally in the same way...
-
Did Catholic monotheism make the universe safe to study?
It is easy to tell the story of science as a clean break from religion. Enlightenment replaces superstition, observation replaces faith, reason replaces authority. It sounds tidy, and it flatters modern assumptions. But it misses something more interesting and, honestly, more uncomfortable for that narrative: the idea that the universe is intelligible in the first place is not self-evident. It is a metaphysical claim. And Catholic monotheism is one of the major historical reasons that claim…
-
Does Christianity actually fear knowledge?
One of the most persistent stereotypes about Christianity is that it fears knowledge. The story is familiar. Religion relies on faith. Science relies on evidence. One asks questions, the other suppresses them. The heroes are the people who challenged religious authority, while the Church stands as the institution that tried to hold them back. There are moments in history that support parts of that story. The Church has made mistakes. It has sometimes resisted new ideas. The Galileo affair…
-
Can Buddhist detachment really be the root of a good moral system?
One thing I have never been able to shake about Buddhism is that its moral vision seems to rest on a foundation that I regard as fundamentally mistaken. I am not talking about all the virtues it encourages. Non-violence is good, Self-control is good, patience is good. A refusal to be consumed by greed or anger is obviously good. Christians should be able to acknowledge virtues wherever they find them. My concern is with the principle underneath those virtues.
Public
2 conversations
7 thoughts
19 upvotes
0 downvotes
0 series
Zero state = nothing, void, emptiness.