UnbornTao

"Sanity is a function of mind; what's true is true already." - Anonymous.

Tiramisù recipe. https://chefjeanpierre.com/recipes/dessert/easy-tiramisu-recipe/

What is there when both your knowledge of 'that tree' and the interpretation of what's perceived to be there are set aside?

@zurew i might elaborate and engage with your points, but the essence is what I wrote above.

Directly grasp is used when referring to kenshos or absolute matters. That apple assertion sounds weird. You might say you concluded, inferred from facts, believe, etc. but I don't know whether one could directly grasp the health of foods or relative matters. Yes, we can easily fool ourselves. Certainly in my estimation most people are describing relative things (experience or state) when attempting to get across their presumed awakening. The bottom line is that this breakthrough (which is rare) can't be accurately communicated so it must be validated for oneself. After all, someone like Gautama might have been hallucinating, deluded, lying. To be clear I'm not claiming to know my nature--I've had a couple of what I consider to be glimpses, into who I am. This is a trap. We would be analyzing the finger instead of looking at the moon. What if we call it blueberry jam? Whatever we have of the absolute is not it. Yet, a metaphor: everything within the ocean is the relative domain. Now, imagine an infinite ocean and it would be the absolute. Being is what is. Experience is indirect and a function of perceptive organs. Direct experience is a misnomer: it is being the thing contemplated, recognizing its nature as not different from your own. I actively avoid talking in a way that feeds fantasy, so don't take these too seriously. This is another way to say that intellectual understanding doesn't mean you actually get it--and this distinction isn't clear to many. What's true? That's the gist of it.

It is empty inside. Dad joke of the day.

Stinks

Why not one of the latest M4 or M4 Pro MacBook Pro's? If you are okay with macOS and aren't going to game on it, in terms of power/efficiency, durability, and especially battery life, they're great. Also, long term software updates. But it'd have to be one with 24gb of unified RAM--it's presumably quite efficient too. I'd also consider the path Windows is going down with the invasive AI, spyware, etc.

"I'm naked on the middle of the street right now and I'm not even on LSD".

Exactly

No lasagna for you.

Low quality post. If you'd like, start a new thread but this time being clear on what you are trying to get across.

Love the passion and enthusiasm; they are contagious.

Matthew 6:19-21 “Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moths and vermin destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moths and vermin do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.” Good question and a better one to ask oneself: What is greed?

Effectively, in this case no. That's what is meant by direct. The realization is the beingness of it; there is no separation. Is is you now. Therein lies the mystery. Why it occurs is just that it somehow occurs. Some people might spend their lifetimes meditating without getting very far, while another might comprehend it without much prior work or intention—or with no previous training at all, like Ramana, though he is an extremely rare case. Go figure. Then again, “why” might not apply; it’s us getting ahead of ourselves. What is it? (I’m talking about the realization itself, not the thoughts about something called “awakening.”) You're still considering it as something. It is no thing, nothing, not nothing, something, everything, all and neither. It exists in the domain of paradox. One can't grasp infinity through the mind. As a game, try to think of infinity. Now, notice everything your mind comes up with is not and can't possibility be, it. The best it can do is imagine, "lots and lots going on forever." This is a notion and as such, relative. Oh, and just to be clear, that doesn’t mean you can’t say anything about it—that’s what language is for. So, if you want a definition, it’s becoming deeply conscious of the absolute nature of you and existence. And there's no substance to it so in truth nothing to be explained. You can articulate shifts within your experience and perhaps the impact it had on your mind, but these are secondary to it, and seem as varied as there are individuals in the world. There is no position to be had. Either one grasps it or does not. Where the work needs to happen is within your experience. What we think of it makes no difference and is standing right now in the way of us wondering about it. Here, we’re having fun chatting. We find ourselves unconscious of our own true nature. Why? We just do. Everything we do occurs within the "dream", so it itself can't produce an experience of waking up. Who does? You. As we exist within it, everything we have is our experience of the dream. In this state, we encounter a paradoxical fact; everywhere we look, ourself isn't to be found. And yet, it seems that having the intention to wake up opens up the possibility for it to occur. That is contemplation. Is the event of waking up caused by what preceded it within the dream? From within the dream, it might appear that way. Having awoken, though, whatever action was thought to be the catalyst, is recognized to have been part of the dream. Independent from all that, somehow "you" woke up. Have you heard of the koan Mu? That’s the ultimate “answer,” and appropriate here. Mu

@Razard86 Edited my response above a bit. All you talk about is relative.

What would it take for you to generate your own feedback? One thing that comes to mind is becoming increasingly aware of your own thought processes and actions throughout a given process. What are you actually doing? Where are you directing your attention? What does the process demand from you that you currently fail to perceive? What could you do more gracefully? Increase your conscious sensitivity of every aspect of your experience by paying attention - you could start with your body, since it is a grounded, objective perception.

@Razard86 Too much "this and that" and asserting things. Things like "there is more than one absolute" are BS. It is clear to me that is not coming from a breakthrough. You can take it as it is.

@Razard86 That's a bunch of intellectual ideation, you are not clear on your nature.

As an exercise, practice making new, finer distinctions within your experience of aromas and the sense of smell. Use the following documents to learn about learning, and to integrate principles such as correction and feedback into your life: fragrance-analysis - Unknown.docx fragrance-terminology - Unknown.docx

Tried to polish up my post above. You take it to be something, perhaps a result of a process, or a hidden, inaccessible piece of knowledge lying somewhere. Certain things seem to help (but aren't a requisite), yet why it happens is an unknown. Perhaps the notion that it is something to be triggered reflects my point that it is considered relative--but I'm nitpicking. I'm going to be even more pedant now. It is a sensible question to ask and sounds coherent on paper, but is based on flawed assumptions. See above. That said, while we are not enlightened, we are going to be engaged in something, doing something. So, contemplating--being open and wanting to get it--seem to help. It is rare, but not impossible, that a breakthrough falls on your ass. Yet again, why this happens is a mystery--there's no causal relationship (there is nothing really), and it is "done"--the insight occurs. Because it doesn't "happen", and why relates to motive, function, purpose, which are invented and applied. Being is as itself already, rather than a result or occurrence, which are relative. At this point, someone like Rinzai could point the way. Believing decreases wanting to inquire into things, in this case your nature. Consider for example how we tacitly live as if our perception were an accurate reflection of objective reality. If we were to experience that as something presumed, we'd be more open to questioning it. But we don't, and so we keep on operating from such presumption. We can see that belief isn't just a thought that you hold as part of your internal dialogue--they can show up for us as reality. Again, are they recognized as beliefs, which implies recognizing that they are not the truth, nor can they be? If or when they are recognized as such, then I don't have a problem with that. In another context, believing yourself to be a capable person, for example, is immensely valuable and positive. You might as well believe yourself to be worthless and live as if that were true. However, both of those are beliefs, not the truth of you. Our main assumption is that our beliefs are mostly cognized by us--yet most of them are just assumed--they are reality for us. This is the point that's easily missed. I think you're considering one particular category of beliefs, that of consciously adopted ones. Assumptions are the most profound of all. The trick lies in recognizing them as such, in a deeply experiential way. From that, increased openness radically empowers your capacity and willingness to question stuff. Depends on the practice, and whether they are "going after" it instead of merely going through the motions. But it isn't about how much time a technique or ritual is followed, or about the practice itself--the practice at best provides direction and focus for the mind. That said, likely the one who is more open. Belief, or the way it is held in one's mind, effectively displaces an experience of openness. Luck doesn't apply; I'm saying we don't know why it happens, and yet it does. A bit like living as a dream character, doing this and that, and all of a sudden waking up from the dream.

I'm not saying lying or self-dishonesty has to be deliberate or conscious; it's just that things might get over our heads, and to varying degrees. Be open. We might think we apprehend the nature of something while in reality we concluded, believed something, etc., and confused these acts with perceiving whatever is true. Just a reminder.