Jack River

@Serotoninluv seems the willingness to stay in nothing/emptiness makes for a more honest/incorruptible observation/search for truth.

As do I dude. It seems to establish a sense of necessary freedom to investigate/explore/observe/learn without that conditioned movement of ego/self. For me, I needed the freedom to seek/explore without the conditioned self corrupting the search or learning.

Unconditioned SEEING/BEING ?

As in that would still be action influenced by escaping what is. It’s in the opposite direction, but still within the confused state of being as the divided self. Depending on satisfaction can lead to an illusion just as conforming to the “idea” that i don’t need to.? Either way problematic situations arise in either case.

Maybe we can also say it’s the dependence on a state of satisfaction that brings about the possibility of dissatisfaction or a “problematic situation”? Seems to boil down to that fundamental resistance of what is or dependence on what should be according to our “selfs/egos” preferences which are based on conditions.

Gotcha

I understand that. Which seems to be expressed in what I referred too. It was all an impression in the first place.

@winterknight and this seems to directly relate to the psychological “me” and it’s resistance/attachment to what is in this moment. What would you say to that dude? If the “me” “movement” is in motion that seems to imply that is resistance/attachment in which pulls up, sees through, “the me” knows(identification). When there is no resistance actually, that recognition too doesn’t seem to take place at all.

This has to do with what we were saying before about recognition. I have noticed that in seeing this as FASLE recognizing, as in “mental categories”, does not respond or even take place. I mean it’s not that there is recognition but I’m aware of its falsness, but no mental categorical impressions appear at all. Do you known what Im getting at?

A clinging to the known gives a type of continuity as the knower. The accumulater is its accumulation. When that accumulation is questioned so is “the accumulator”. That kinda what you mean dude?

Fosho. I feel ya. I see what you were getting at now. Of course I’m not referring to the idea/thought. “I” know that “I’m” blind

No I understand that. Lol No I’m not arguing my dude. I am aware that “the physical” is just conditioned perception limited by senses/thought. Is that what you are meaning by illusion?

Which is why the actual seeing of the fact ends the fact . That’s the awsome thing about this If the fact is actually the case, as in “taking place”, this “movement”, then that is the fact. But the SEEING of “the fact” ends the fact. Because the fact was dependent on not SEEING it as false/illusion.. Do you see how I am using fact/actual. We need to remember that if this movement is “in motion” it is bringing about ACTUAL physical responses. “The movement” does bring about an actual physiological reaction. The change in body is not illusion, and my responses expressed as action in accordance to that, as in outwrd expression, is not an illusion. That is then a reality. An illusion can easily lead to a reality. How we use the words makes all the difference. We can use the words differently.. Do we see the fact of illusion. Do we see the reality of illusion. Do we see the actuality of illusion. As in can we see this illusion in movement as an illusion. You see how we can use these words reality/actual/fact?

Which was implied in my first post too. Being limited to thought/selfs defensive reaction is an expression of that material process. Means intelligence that is beyond thought is not putting order in thought so it can actually be logical, reasonable.

Ok, well still same thing. The mental/psychological is also physiological. Thought is a movement of material process. The psychological self is a movement/process of thought.

Depends what you mean by belief. To me belief implies fear. And fear only exist and is acted upon or as (belief) when still being caught in the false division between the thinker and thought, feeler and the feeling, experiencer and the experience. No self no belief in either direction. As in belief or disbelief.

@winterknight no dude. I am speaking in regards to being caught up in the illusion of divison. As in the lower case s “self” That was my original intention of my communication. This holistic unconditional undivided awareness that observes thought as movement sees the illusion, and in that seeing is action that ends that movement of self/ego/divison.

If the self sees it as true, it is acted upon, and therefore is actual. This can be seen in the world today. The “individual” is the world. Right dude, or are you referring to this in a different light?

Yes, this movement is a reaction that when seen as true and then acted upon becomes very actual. Just as it is said we invent/create our own reality.

Because the mental and the psychological are one movement of the self, which is a reaction. The self clings to its own content(thought). This is attachment/resistance/identification in process. Then we are always denying an actual relationship/communication with each other. Politics, science, and religious dogma is a great example.

The movement of conditioning as the self. The movement of conditioning as in psychological time. A constant movement from the past that continues through the present to anticipate its safety in the future. This is the movement of conflict between 'what is' and 'what should be', between the thinker and the thought. As in psychological reaction that resists the fact and seeks to control that fact by reacting by pursuing an abstraction of what would secure that insecure ? movement of self. If that movement ends, then there is no ‘what is’ at all, or that movement that was actual, as this psychological movement of self that did bring about chemical changes in the body’s disposition stops. You know that feeling of anger, when your temperature rises, you start sweeting, and such...So that movement of time/thought which was an actual process in motion stops, as does the effects on the organism itself, like the temperature regulates itself again, sweet machine turns off. Lol ? You see, the action that arises from that movement of self/time no matter the case is actual and is taking place either in the body as chemical reaction, or the actuality that may be expressed as a result of that movement being acted upon. For example, in I’m angry so I run over some poor dude with my car as a result of that actual state of anger. It may be an illusion but it can still be actual. For example, if I react out of anger. That seems to arise from a thought about another thought that interprets an insult as being bad or unfavorable according the meaning given..That seems to arise because of the psychological movement that resisted any type of insecure feeling or notion of that “unfavorable” interpretation or image that I may have about myself. All of that makes for a movement that becomes actual. As well as the physical/outward action that may be taken as a result, like killing the person who insulted me. Desire, attachment, the self and it’s process of identification, pleasure seeking, all are a movement of self/time influenced by past bias/prejudice avoiding the actuality of the fact to provide itself a sense of psychological security. All a movement of fear trying to escape itself..This movement is actual as it is in motion. Im most cases action is influenced by that actuality which breeds an outward expression that manifests as antagonism/violence. Awareness observes the entire content of thought as a whole. It doesn’t see its content as just its verbal/conceptual meanings, but sees the content as its meaning and its relationship to feelings/emotional reactions. It is not the self with its bias/prejudice observing the content, but thought itself is observing the content/feelings/emotions/verbal/intellectual meanings as one unit in movement in reaction to what is or as one movement of the self that resists what is and pursues its idea of what should be. This is the self looking for psychological security in thought or can be seen as resistance/attachment which identifies with what is familiar. Thought. It’s knowledge/experience or memory. Ultimately this seems to be all a process that arises when the experiencer acts on the idea that “it” is different from what it experiences, an illusion as you said before. Thought is always a movement from this to that, here to their, or a movement of becoming, or not becoming. Or accepting or denying.

Not talking about the content(word/image). life is movement, life is change. What is can be seen as being both dynamic and still. Many people do not seem to be in touch with thought as movement. This to me seems to make for a rather impossible type of awareness.

The self/ego tends to defend its own bias first and foremost. We in most cases are not interested in truth but what makes the psychological me secure psychologically. The self looks for answers to defend its own predisposition by engaging in argument as opposed to simply learning about the problem and being able to suspend our own personal bias for the sake of investigation. So instead of looking to understand a problem together first and foremost, we instead fight about who’s answer/opinion/idea fits our own preconceived conclusions. all of this type of back and forth argument is a type of psychological reaction itself. A manifestation of being trapped in a materialist mindset. To cling to our own bias and not being able to suspend such, there is no possiblity to actually be logical, reasonable. It’s type of disease. A product of fragmentation. I think we need to be able to understand our own limits, such as psychological becoming, before going into whether or not a material process such as thought can go beyond itself.

What I am saying is simply we can say that thought is a process or active movement and it is actually taking place. Thought is movement, but thought also tries to hold fast to itself and seek security in its meaning, as in the self that seeks psychological security in itself in accordance to the verbal/intellectual meaning. This is in itself an illusion. Also the content of thought when interpreted is a description of what is meant to be described. A way of looking at stuff and identifying stuff through an image. But the image is never what is being referred to. But as far as thought as a process in movement, thought can be also seen as actual, as in there is a physical reaction taking place in the body as thought moves. Whether or not this reaction takes place depends, from what I have witnessed, solely on the degree that the illusion is sustained by the belief (illusion) that the thinker is independent of thought content/image itself. Thought seems to activate as a response of the organism itself. But thought and its material process/movement in that sense is actual. I would say that this is active/movement/process within another process. A reaction between the organism/environment.

We can question what is the relationship of thinking to reality.. with unconditioned/undivided awareness we can see that thought itself is in an actual process of movement. This is what I refer to as awareness that ends its own movement.