Jack River

@i am I AM lol the me that wants to get rid of aspects is also an part of experience. What happens when there isn’t an experience?

Identification=Desire, which is an expression of fear resisting itself. They are really all the same. Identification=desire=fear=resistance=conflict=self. All one movement of psychological time. The seach for psychological security is the same as desire in pursuit. And in that sets a foundation for fear. Most excellent to see the actuality as a single movement of time. ?

I mean Nonbeing as in not seeing through the filter of experience. I call it unconscious or unawareness as in the quality of not being known or recognized from the storehouse of mind. It’s direct/not an experience.

Groovy thing is even direct experience isn’t SEEING. To experience isn’t direct.

Life changing too. Makes awareness so simple.

To see all these distinctions as not actually seperate but as one unit in movement. That makes for a profound awareness.

Resistance implies Nice way to questionize it

That’s what I said too. Lol i am just saying we make distinctions between desire and resistance, but they are the same. Do you see what I mean? As far as psychological movement or phenomenon.

Is desire a concept? Or a movement of resistance Psychologically?

I call this unconsciousness/nonbeing

@Consilience have you seen the distinctions we apply when looking “inward”, psychologically? As I referred to earlier.

Fosho. Distinction is relative. We make the distinction between say relative and absolute.

I feel ya man.

You’re referring to synthetic distinction right?

Holistic insight sees all distinctions as actually one actuality. To observe the whole of thought, as in awareness, all distinctions dissolve and that awareness sees those distinctions as actually one movement as self. In this awareness dissolves fear/desire/attachment/resistance/psychological time. And when all that is not in action then the groovy stuff happens where those distinctions are not made in “experience” any longer. It’s really not an experience. Most excellent.

Another way to understand the subtly of distinction and it’s tendency to treat distinctions as actually separate is to take this example.. Is the distinction between desire and fear actual? Are they separate? Or resistance and attachment.. Or anger and fear Or identification/attachment/resistance/being fear. This is an example of the mechanism of thought and how it forms distinctions. This can be observed first hand too dudes. Pretty cool. This may give a little hint to what Leo is pointing at.

Pretty awsome to come to all this without learning it intellectually first. Cuts out illusion and seems to be overall much more speacial that way to me. ?

I feel what your saying. I should have been more clear. What I meant was trying to solve/figure out the mystery destroys the mystery. I go about it much differently. In the total silence/“state” of nothingness the mystery is of itself. To be it actually/directly as in as a “experiencing”. To me communication of that of mind/thought is useful as that may contribute to the essence of awareness that observes thought/mind to dissolve it. But to me no, communicating the beyond tends to lead to problems because mind/thought will imitate the unknown and continue to fuel the false division/distinction. Tends to lead to self deception. That’s how I see it anyway. Now if you are two fiends that have already “entered the unknown realm of nonbeing” then that can be different, as thee can be no entry to that with when limited by self deception. To me It’s not a understanding the unknown but an ending of knowing. If you get what I mean brah

@Joseph Maynor its all good brah. That's what I am expressing here though. ”me” and thinking are irrelevant. Point was communicating the mystery destroys the mystery. Right dude? I was referring to self and its compulsion to explain it by the knowledge it has accumulated. Wasn’t towards you dude. We are one?

To much reading and regurgitating of knowledge dudes. It's all in silence

You don’t give up anything. And it’s not what you think. You cannot come to this by contemplation. Only in the nothingness/nonbeing “state” is there this WHAT IS. When “you” are actually not dudes.

If there is fear/any movement to accept or unaccpet then mind/self has not actually fallen away. This type of nonthing is not come to positivity but negatively. When self dissolves it is clear.

The confusion arises if mind is trying to comprehend ideas/concepts about this. There is really no accepting or condemning Evil at all. This reactionary response is division based and a reflection of contradiction/thinking/the thinker. All that is still a conditioned response of the chooser/self/mind. I say it’s dangerous to communicate this to people because thought misinterprets it. It cannnot be understood by mind itself. Mind has to come to a “state” of NONBEING. The best thing I ever did was stay away of explanations of this seeing through nonbeing. The less conditioned activity of mind the clearer it all becomes. Plus we don not destroy the brilliance of the mysterious by trying to explain it away with thought/psychological compulsion. Much more direct and glorious dudes.

This is the way it’s perceived as seen here too. There is no actual distinction made between thought and truth. That distinction arises with awareness yes, but when awareness puts enough order in thought/self it dissolves and there is no thinking/voice. In that there are still separating/distinctions made. It seems If we are still dividing the image and the screen we are still in the pattern of identification. I do see it this way. Only I would say being is comes from identifying that I am awareness. But to me awareness is an energy or essence of this source nonbeing/unawareness. When nothingness/Truth itself acts as awareness, that observes “the parts”, like the function of thought/voice etc. It is seen in this “state” of nonbeing/unawareness that there is only truth/the whole. There seems no division actually. Division only holds up in mind. This is why I don't like to say I am this or I am that. If I identify with what ever, that just seems to be short changing it all. But for explanation purposes I would say nonbeing/unawareness is what( I )am. And awareness is an expression or function/essence of unlimited energy that is aware of the functions of self/thought/voice. @cetus56 understands what I mean by nonbeing/unawareness. It’s going beyond being/awareness. Here all division actually breaks down. Awareness seems to be an energy that can observe self consciousness, which brings about order/being. But depending on the degree or potency of that awareness there can be a dissolving of the distinction between awareness and self consciousness, which is what seems to be left as the ground, as in nonbeing/unawareness. To me Nonbeing underlies being, and being underlies the conditioned consciousness/self/voice. Self consciousness ———————— BEing ———————— NONBEING Really all one. Anyway that’s how I see it dudes?