Jack River

Identification in general is thought transcending it’s own limitation. In most cases this dis-identification has its root in a reaction to being identified. Which still remains identification/attachment/resistance. Thought in a confused muddle.

Life is a series of actions(life is action). No matter what action is going to take place. What influences these actions/non-actions is what concerns me. If it is time(psychological reaction/fear-isolation) then such action will make for trouble for ourselves/others/world. The desire I speak of has no place. Again, thought transcending it’s own limitation. Now we may make mistakes and we are not perfect in that regard, but we can attend to such mistakes. This is what I like to share with people. And this is not a desire based action. I feel absolutely responsible for the whole of what-is. We can call it Big self Desire if we like...but it is not an action that has its root in fear-isolation/time(dependence upon things). It has its root in no-thing-ness/that which is indivisible/whole.

I think I see what you are saying. I don’t think of communication of freedom as being desire based. Just so you know. Indeed important. This is what I mean by awareness of thought transcending it’s own limitation. Think I understand you. As I see it, my communication with others about self knowledge is not influenced by advising to go the desire path or non desire path, but is simply expressing the nature of a path and its relationship to the seeker directly or indirectly. For me whether one should go the desire path or not isn’t important. What is important to me and what I feel applies to all human kind is that the path is the me. What-is is contained right here in the self. I just keep it simple by not bringing “true desire” into the equation. Simply because the mind is so subtle is will adopt that as an escape. For me Desire is of the brain. And is simply defensive and a movement/action that has its root in isolation/alienation. To stay with this fact without escape we find that fact dissolved..which is to transcend it. That calling for our divinity I don’t consider desire based is all. But in freedom that desire is cleared so we can act as responsible beings. This may be what you are referring to as Big self desire. That’s it...only I don’t call it Desire at all.? the desire I speak of is always in reference to fear/isolation-reaction to suffering.

Indeed so. That is most likely the non-action and is due to psychological resistance as well. They would be consumed by there own self-interest. Caught in the conflict of choosing psychologically. If that non-action is due to psychological confusion then that seems like an non-action due to resistance/delusion. No. That would be using thought where it doesn’t belong(psyche) and not using thought for what it is intended for(planning-anticipating etc). Good question. When you say contengent on time I think psychological conditions. Like I only act on what serves the image I have about myself. This what you are referring to? Fosho. Although, this psychological illusion of resistance/choosing between the opposites seems to be what usually gets in the way of that. Many people seem to accumulate various psychological disorders from childhood and up, and that interferes with how we act or in this case do not act when we are adults. Good questions though. I think it needed a little ironing out.

Can there be a modified progression from dependence to non-dependence psychologically?

I don’t see what I have posted as being mental masterbation. It is a tremendous insight to see the fact that psychologically my accumulated preferences/options in which i act on, move away from the fact, are what actually sustains the very fact. The fact is what is relevant. The fact stands alone. If it doesn’t, there will be distortion. To superimpose what should or should not be, in regards to ourselves, is to impose on oneself duality/conflict/contradiction. In that state we very subtly say we shouldn’t depend on others, yet remain to do so anyway. But we are not honest that we do so. We are then living in a falsity. My point is simply that thought will always move away from the fact (psychological dependence) to an abstraction (no-dependence) , yet that original fact inevitably remains. The mind in this case has created an opposite out of its own opposite. To react to dependence by creating and pursuing non-dependence, you will see remains dependence. This is still a conditioned action. Dependence and conditions go together... Dependence has no opposite. Do you see what I mean my dude. Just wanted to explain a little more

@EvilAngel I would just sit on this for an while. It’s something you may appreciate to see on your own. I did.

Ok dude Communication can be tough with this stuff. We may commune soon enough. ?

If he stays with what-is(psychologically) is he deceiving himself? Which means not reacting/resisting the reality of what is the case in him or her self. This doesn’t imply accepting or condemning what-is. It means he/she is actually open to change. Please, I know it’s perhaps a bit confusing, but explore into it yourself. There is beauty to be found in this.

What I communicate is often misunderstood. Feel free to point out any grammatical errors though. I would like to improve in that field.

@Nahm this is in reference to psychological resistance. Putting warm feet next to a fire because they are cold is intelligent action. Thinking about whether I should warm my feet or not because I have heard various gurus say/claim it is resistance to what-is, is resistance to what-is. This is because I am looking to “my” memory to solve a psychological imposed problem. When the self(movement of psyche) looks to its memory to choose between that of memory, that is thought transcending it’s own inherent limit. If your feet are cold, warm them up, or don’t. But don’t sit there and make it a psychological problem. Hehe right dude?

Hehe. I see you nahm?

I don’t get what is so confusing about what I said. Im referring to choice psychologically. Choosing/deciding is a function of thought. To employ as a means of function. It’s an important tool.

Point to this error if you would. Help a brotha out eh?

I’ll be mentally ill with you? and there is nothing I can do about it is not a bad stance to take either dude. but if you really saw that, would there be conflict?

@Aakash thinking is a most excellent tool we use for practical/technological/functional purposes, and is essential. I’m referring to psychological field.

Putting thought in its right place is essential. And psychologically thought(cultivation/progression/gradual effort) has no place. Psychologically acceptance or condemning prevents CHANGE.

Psychological growth/evolution is self deception and prevents change. This may sound confusing, but it is so. It’s not my opinion. If I am perpetually moving away from the fact of my antagonism to the opposite of that, I am constantly living a contradictory life. A life of hypocrisy/illusion.

Anything that arises psychologically is what is and anything you do to change it, is self deception. Its a fundamental distortion of thought. You cannot modify anger to non anger, violence to non-violence etc.

Whether there is an answer or not is not the point as of now. Do you understand the problem? Or have you atleast gone into a little?

No, I’m just referring to choice when it comes to the psychological realm in this thread. But as to your original question, resistance is the dilemma of not being able to choose because of confusion. If I need to support myself, that’s it, I just act. Why sit there and say I should or shouldn’t. we can use thought, or let it use us.

Conforming to standards of “positive” and avoiding “the negative” is all part of this resistance to what-is. You seem to be noticing discontent with life and that is not a bad thing. The question is do you want to quickly find an answer to this discontent, or do you want to stay with that discontent long enough to understand it?

What someone should or should not do is besides the point. The point is is one dependent on others or not, and is this fact of dependence seen as it is and not distorted by what we feel should be. If @EvilAngel sees that they are dependent and stays with that fact, well that is a great place to be. That is staying with what is and not escaping/resistance.

@Nahm Yeah, why do we need to choose between two opposing choices or be confused about what to do.. (should I or should I not) in that situation? Why not just act, or don’t. ?

Dependence is isolation/alienation Aloneness is relationship/communion