Jack River

Fosho ?? There’s nothing or nobody to fear Investigate our own thinking is most excellent way to start this exploration.

Direct experience and pointers can also lead to greater difficulties. First we have to ask what is a direct experience? Do we recognize that experience? If we do not recognize an experience is it an experience? And do the various pointers we accumulate over time determine any given experience we have? Are these “direct experiences” simply a projection of thought? Go into these questions. I found it was pretty gnarly to go into them

We may see that accumulating information (knowledge/experience) in order to die is actually a long progressive/process in resistance to death.

Ego/self moves positively or negatively. Without that dynamic, the role of ego becomes threatened. The ego feeds off its own continuity (moving positively-negatively) to maintain its own continuity.

Can Claiming Higher Spiral Dynamic Stages Tease the Ego?.. The ego is a spiral. A progressive movement of the center moving in time towards a projected and fixed goal.

There is the learning of accumulation/recording knowledge/experience(thought) and there is the learning of NO psychological recording. All learning of recording/accumulated knowledge/experience(thought) is relative.. Can we say the learning without the “psychological” recording is relative?

More of an intellectual guiding, which is relative. With a holistic understanding of “the relative” as a veil/lens, then all that comes to an end. So the “absolute” remains in the form of complete silence/emptiness/ “mind” with no”thing” in it.

Fosho..In the understanding is the ending of fear.

Maybe assuming time is necessary =Fear

Am “I” different than the “fear” that I wish to confront? Is this “i” and “fear” the product of the past(thought)?

How to let go of racism? That “me” that wants to let go of racism is racism. Racism is, because you are looking through the lens of divison which means seeing through the veil of resistance|attachment, identification ‘with’ the contents of experience/knowledge.

? this helped me to see the difference. Especially with people here on the forum who would contest to that statement. It’s kinda a example of how confused thought makes things. Another subtle exclusion that thought will make.

It’s like my mom that said she experienced Jesus. She said to me one day, “you don’t belive me do you?” I said I no I do. She did experience Jesus. But which “what-is” might that have been?

Or an example would be “hey look at that illusion”!! Lol its gotta be a form of “what-is” to be able to spot it as such.

Fosho dude.

I know what trapped me was I would here from teachers to be in “the present”. This made me unconsciously escape any given experience as it was. I would close my eyes to anger/fear in order to avoid it, instead of looking at the experience and learning about the “process/movement” as it arised. It seems most of us will identify with what we want experience to be, which is another aspect or expression of the veil/“me” that projects its bias.

Fosho

It’s important to understand that we have to start with the what-is as it is manifestating itself at any given moment as it is happening. So if there is anger that is the fact. Thought will disidentify with that experience just as it will identify with that experience. Its like starting close before going far. The close is the experience of knowledge/memory, and maybe if that is seen through there is an experiencing without that veil. Both can be considered what-is. It’s just a way of explaining a happening. Would you say that makes sense @robdl

Once that what-is is seen Holistically, maybe that what is will fall away and reveal another what is

Yes. We tend to avoid that fact of “I am angry, but I should be “not angry”. This sustains that “me’ness”. We escape what is. In this case that what is, is movement of self. That’s a big step. Just being able to stay with what is actually happening, which is the “anger”.

@Ampresus the self clings to what is familiar to it. Or that self reacts to what is familiar and chooses in another direction it’s opposite. We tend to see as we understand ourselves that we are a bundle of memory’s. We cling too or react to that content of memory. We see that the self and what it identifies with, is basically that of the past(thought content).

Oh.. lol It’s all good dude. He has said his job is to take take hits yet not record them. Maintaining awareness through relationship is his thing.

I’m sure he’s doing good. He’s a different kinda dude. He seems pretty happy all the time. Why, what did you do you jerk?

Haven’t talked to him in while now. He spends a lot of time with his son. And he spends a lot of time without his head

In most cases when you question people’s religious preference it seems to them that they are being attacked directly, as in the personal sense of self. This happened to me when I was 17 years old. I questioned the whole thing and its obviousness and refused to play the game. They say me down and said I had to play by the rules of the house or I had to leave. So I left. When we oppose someone's dogmas in most cases may they feel attacked personally. We are our accumulated knowledge/experience. The self is it’s content that has been accumulated and attachment too over time/the past. This is why people tend to form groups and exclude the opposed bias. This is a form of isolation/fear. Kinda sad, especially with people like my parents that were programmed to this type of living.