Jack River

As in 24/7 choiceless awareness ? Then experience doesn’t get attached too, or time isn’t in a constant state of clinging to mind content/the familiar/ the known. As in no more self identifying with its content which projects the fixed nature of experience or the old/the known/thought. I think I am following the way your laying it down?.

Right on?

I didn’t have a gradual set of awakenings. I think there is really one seeing. For me it seems that when we see the falsity in gradual process actually with the insight that I told you about that ends that pattern totally. The insight is huge. It’s instant seeing into the whole limit of the intellect. Well to me personality inherently suffers. I mean, to say we must develop a personality first is like saying suffering is necessary to end suffering. But the thing is we have a personality whether we want one or not and we do suffer. I would say instead of saying that it is necessary, which makes no sense because we have no choice in that either way, that we may want to instead ask ourselves if we need to further cultivate that personality and prolong suffering to end that movement of time..or if we should instead see the falsity in resisting suffering and trying to cultivate the personality to its destruction. To me suffering isn’t necessary but seeing how resisting it is. And to me cultivating an ego to its point of destruction seems like a cleaver way for the personality to sustain it own pattern of time. To me It’s not necessary to cultivate an ego but instead see the falsity in doing that. This is why there is a truth in the saying that freedom is not in time, but in the NOW. Thought like to postpone dudes. Every action it takes puts freedom away in “time/future.” Thought needs to keep its movement going. Anyway that is my take brah.

@who chit back to you dude?

@Emanyalpsid once there is freedom the division between truth and reality/thought falls away totally. You see that reality/thought is simply a function of truth itself. Words no longer arise from reaction/choice/confusion, but instead from order/nonreaction,choiclessness.

I within the last month have gone through this. My intellect capacity is very poor. Before the holistic insight of intelligence/truth/awareness I couldn’t communicate anything. The confusion was way to deep as thought was always contradicting itself due to psychological time/desire. When that psychological time stops so does the attachment/dependence/identification which seems to make thought run corrupt. When insight/truth comprehends the whole of reality/thought then communication is the product of truth directly. Thought is the function that relays truth, but truth is not in essence the product of thought/reality. So words arise spontaneously when they are not born of the reactionary nature of thought. I feel what you are saying correct @who chit?

I personally see practices in the direction of psychological becoming as totally irrational. But from what people say that is realized as a result of applying them. As far as practices like applying thought/rational thinking to solve practical/functional/physical or outward problems that is rational and has its purpose. I would say that actual rational thinking, as in the product of holistic insight, is aware of what makes thought/rationality irrational. I’m not into science but I appreciate it. As long as we don’t think it leads to truth and is depended on to bring psychological satisfaction it’s all good dudes.

I’m not sure if you get what I’m saying but..what did you mean by practices are rational?

Lol ?. Hot girl or old man, oh well. Error will arise when we don’t understand our own limits. From what I see she or he pointed to some of those limits. It’s all good though because when it comes down to it, understanding/self reflection is not given to someone anyway. Nobody can help us. Right pointing/promoting interest in not being dependent on others is a good thing right?

You gone into the limits of self inquiry and rationality? Comprehending those limits brings about a more consistent line of thinking. The understanding of those limits prevents thoughts corrupt nature from corrupting the flow of investigation. David bohm is a good example of a dude who was a gnarly thinker but not limited by that field itself. Because he was aware holistically of thoughts limits.

Then we just use each other and rationalized it as Love. Lol . Pleasure is even worse when rationalized dudes.

Attachment/dependence which is fear is the product of this strategy. In a “relationship”, that is the killer of love/care

Instead of tryitng to cultivate through these “stages of development” maybe we should ask the question of if these stages are actual, and if this process of psychological growth can end all together. Instead of moving within the limited field of time maybe we can transcend that field by one holistic insight into the falsity of gradual progression. Just a question you can ask yourselves my dudes? I mean common dudes, what if freedom is now and this “progression/gradual process is the procrastination of FREEDOM. As in the now. If we move within the field of measure/time don’t we keep that measure/time as a constant?

@cetus56 groovy?

But she also points to the importance of understanding mind/thought/time/self. I think it’s good also because she might be able grab the attention of intellectuals who are enslaved by the tool/mechanism of thought. It is correct that we don’t need an explanation for psychological time to end or to “be liberated”, but some still do not see the limitation of thought/self and moving within time or psychological evolution as being unnecessary and self actually sustaining psychological attachment. She points to important traps like clinging and projecting truth and enlightened action as if it was fixed. Either way she points to what are to me the biggest traps that prevent total freedom. @Emanyalpsid I feel ya though, her communication style can be difficult for people who don’t understand the nature of thought, but she does promote self understanding. Again she may reach intellectuals who are extremely identified with there own storehouse of thought content. In that sense I think her style can be useful.

Nonbeing also referred to as headlessness. Hats off to my bro faceless ?

The particular mind a function of the universal mind. Or thought a function of Truth. Or time movement a function of the ground. Being, the function of nonbeing. ?

Yep the seeing is its own doing?

??? i feel ya dude. For me silence is now the ground and time movement is the occasional function that arises from the ground. Use to be the opposite a month ago. The way it is now seems to be the only way being on the forum is tolerable. It is almost beach time. Good day @cetus56?

The unknown is not understandable nor would it be as sweet if t was. That of thought/time can be understood, and with that understanding is the silence of time/thought. Then the mechanism that is attached to “understanding” comes to a stop, psychologically of course. We then can use the mechanism to communicate or for other practical purposes, like @deci belle is doing. Personally to me her writing challenges my simple low level intellect, but I like it, because she seems to get significant points about liberation. The terms and knowledge she uses is foreign to me, which helps me understand different kinds of other language styles. I wouldn’t personally call it practice, but I agree here. It’s an all day affair, fosho. I’m sure we won’t agree on everything, but I appreciate your post @deci belle?

But @cetus56Practice kills and prevents the silence brah

@Hellspeed she shared some good points on clinging to experience. She seems like a writer doing her thing. No need to playa hate dude Also the thread promotes the study of oneself to forget oneself. It’s good stuff in that aspect. Understanding the self ends the self. Freedom is when time is not.

Funny thing is when we do this we may realize that we don’t any longer see the point in looking to scientific method or The Who am I self inquiry technique. This is what I noticed anyway.

It seems a problem arises when we don’t understand the nature of the mechanism used before looking for truth in scienctifiv method or self inquiry, as in ‘The Who am I’ technique. Until we understand what it means or the importance of actually being an objective observer we will always seem to enter in with pre-assumptions and our motive to attain an answer due to psychological satisfaction or gratification will distort the integrity of the investigation. I mean we start to look for answers before we understand the complex mechanism that concludes on certain answers according to our own bias/experience. If we start with self reflection/understanding of our limitations, then maybe we can go further. But until then I think we need to understand what we use to apply the technique of “who am I” or the scientific method, which is the nature of thought and it’s relationship to the falsity of psychological evolution. Seems pretty sensible too right dudes?

@deci belle Please let me go over this a little more. Appreciate your time responding.