Reflectivity is a central concept for the seeker... each moment has a kind of unchangeable quality which isn't about its content, but is a reflection of the experiencer, of the Self. The seeker needs to chase that reflectivity, which is nothing but being, awareness, bliss and, the I. The chase for reflectivity can never result in catching it, but it can result in a restructuring of the mind that destroys the ignorant belief that "I am an experiencing, doing person" that conceals the *true* reflectivity.
How can a seeker do self-inquiry or surrender even while doing mentally challenging tasks?
Seekers of enlightenment or nondual liberation must do self-inquiry or surrender at every waking moment. But how is this compatible with complex mental tasks in daily life? It seems like they must interfere with each other. There are a few different ways to answer this question. At one level the answer is that practice makes perfect. At another level the answer is that the very issue is rooted in the egoic illusion, which inquiry and surrender are aimed at destroying. You are not the thinker of your thoughts and doer of your actions.
To cut identification with thought, we search for it and find it doesn't exist
Thought -- or rather, more specifically, taking thought seriously, 'identifying with it' -- is the root of all our dissatisfaction, unhappiness, and existential confusion. To pierce the identification, we repeatedly attempt to discern the background against which thoughts occur, and the end result is that identification is realized to be a fiction. No one was affected by it, no one pierced it. But paradoxically, great effort is required for this to happen.
Enlightenment and the Tenth Person
Enlightenment is ultimately about clearing up a simple misconception about who you are. The simplicity of it all is illustrated by the classic story of the tenth man.
Ramana Maharshi's self-inquiry and traditional advaita vedanta
Ramana Maharshi's simple self-inquiry instruction -- to attempt to chase and locate the "I" -- may seem, at first glance, to be quite different from the more scriptural and thinking-based instruction of traditional advaita vedanta. But this difference is only on the surface. Both ultimately come to exactly the same method from just slightly different angles: quiet the mind and discern away the unchanging by investigating the "I" thought. By doing so, the normal I disappears and an intuition is generated which destroys ignorance. What is left is the Self, which was always there, but simply was't recognized because of that ignorance.
The concept of satori & advaita vedanta: stillness & insight
Satori is the concept in Japanese buddhism that suggests a profound, sudden insight. It is cultivated out of mental silence and concentration, but is not simply the same as them. Out of stillness, a looking or noticing emerges. The same scheme is present in advaita vedanta. Mental purity and then discernment or looking happens -- and that results in true knowledge. The fruit of knowledge is further silence.
The riddle-like nature of self-inquiry: where is God?
Self-inquiry -- the search for the true "I" -- cannot simply be a matter of any kind of concentration or search by the mind. One can quiet the mind that way, but then one hits a wall. But that mental search quiets the mind and, eventually, through a process of concentration, allows something to emerge that goes beyond the conceptual. I demonstrate through the Hindu story of Prahlada, and with reference to the text Vakya Vritti.
Unbroken concentration is the means and the end of spiritual liberation
All spiritual paths are ultimately aimed at moving away from the rufflings of thought and towards the smooth, unbroken concentration that is initially pursued with effort, but is finally simply recognized as our true nature.
Oriented towards the thought that isn't a thought, thought is cut up, evaporates, and peace remains
Through self-inquiry and surrender, we orient towards the thought that is the base of all other thoughts... the thought that isn't a thought, that is our Self. Its vast impenetrable space is that against which all other thoughts dash themselves and evaporate harmlessly. Orienting towards that, we realize that there is nothing but that orientation, effortlessly and always.
Traditional advaita vedanta vs. neo-advaita
Traditional advaita vedanta (the 'nondual' school of Hindu mysticism) is often contrasted with so-called neo-advaita, but what are the real differences between the two? The key hinges on the meaning of neo-advaita, which has been interpreted in two dramatically different ways. The first way, which simply says no effort is needed or possible, is justly criticized. The second way, which emphasizes inward looking, is actually just a rephrasing of traditional advaita vedanta from a different perspective.