Ananta

Exactly!

Basically, yes. They don't have an ego. But, they are always in the present moment. (Ie, they don't have thoughts of past or future). Their minds just don't have the ability to know their true nature. My cats sure seem like little Budda's though...lol.

@Rilles nice! Imo, they are very subtle objects. Yep! Waking mindfulness works the same way. Meaning, no need for sitting meditation, if that's not ur thing. Right, you can't stop it permanently anyways, because it's not you that is that thinker of the thoughts to begin with. What are you referring to here?

@Etagnwo +1

Oooo, don't ruin it! I want one of those lollipop rings! Hehehe

@Etagnwo I guess the secrets out, best tell the kiddies of our engagement. LOL!!!

I love real butter, yum!

The choking comment was a joke, because I said Rumi's quotes were "word salad". Ya-know...choke on salad... haha. Geesh Listen, I appologized to you..but if you aren't going to accept my apology, then so be it. Anything else you'd like to say...?

Awe, I missed you so much where have you been? Xoxo!!!! Thanks for setting me straight! Oh you're sooooooooooo right. God, I'm soooooooo afraid. How did u know wise one??? Lmao!

@blazed Oops I pissed you off. Sorry about that. I'm just blunt and somewhat opinionated. Don't mind me, carry on.

Yes, I know! It's sad really. I recall all the crazy crap I thought years ago from listening to the wrong people. It can have you chasing your tail for a very long time. I'm glad that's over.

Well, hopefully no offense will be taken by this, but Leo is not my teacher (to me, he's just the guy that runs this website), so if he'd like a quote on his signature from this word salad guy, then I'd say, it's really not my business. But, in this thread Leo said to you, "There is no such thing as non-existence, only existence. Non-existence is a concept existing in your mind." So, if you think of Leo as your teacher (or one of your teachers), then he's telling you he doesn't agree with what Rumi is saying about non-existence , right?

Oh my, that's a lot of word salad. I feel like I'm choking on it. His usage of the word non-existence is just ridiculous. My advice would be to get yourself another teaching.

You crack me up!

Yeah, right! Lol

@Mikael89 Sweet!

Um, yeah, no. Truth/awareness is Sat-chit-ananda, which indicates "limitless conscious existence". Perhaps, insights while tripping on acid, aren't all that reliable. Just sayin'

Really? How so? Please be as descriptive as possible, so that I can hopefully understand why you would say this? Not that it really matters. Actually, I don't think I've ever communicated with you before now.

@Etagnwo +1

It's not an either/or understanding, but a both/and. Meaning there is only me, awareness, so no delineated line really exists between, me and the objects that appear within me. However, there is a gap or space that can figuratively be created to "see" (neti-neti) thought and other objects as not Self, until Self-knowledge is firm. In this regard there is a feeling that "I", pure awareness, just AM and Im aware OF all objects and they are false/illusions. This is helpful for discriminating the real from unreal. There is a shift in perspective from being identified with/as the I-thought/ego (thinking it is me), to be-ing awareness, that's just "associated" with the apparent person. This seemed a bit long winded, sorry.

@Preetom I'll have to answer the 2nd part later...I ran out of that illusory thing, called time.

Here is where I find many misunderstandings happen- daily life... is very similiar...then it use to be, except I don't believe/identify with the story (good or bad, which are just labels). There is still pleasure and pain too, its all a part of the human condition which you are "associated". That's not going to change. I know who/what I really am and I don't forget that knowledge (anymore) or should I say, the knowledge that "I AM" awareness is readily available, at all times, when called upon . As I view life mostly from that perspective, but getting engrossed in thought for practical purposes (etc) happens and isn't a problem. I still play roles as the apparent person-(mother/wife/nurse/sister/daughter...blah-blah), but I'm not that! Doing happens, but I'm not doing it. It took a long time to "get" that... it still may feel like theres a "me" doing it, at times, but that's part of the set-up, the game. It's designed that way. I started this journey-less journey (lol) 9 years ago. So it didn't happen over night and there's not one thing practice wise, reading wise or even teacher wise that I could say would for sure work for another to wake them up. Actually, waking up isnt that hard, its staying awake and understanding it. Peace Ps, ...and don't think you or someone else will turn into Mother Teresa just because they're awake. That won't happen unless, of course, it's that person's karma to do so.

Yes, but it's a non-experience, it only seems like an experience to the ego. Its awakening "from" thinking ur an ego, thats why its not an experience. It's seeing from the perspective of yourself (awareness) and being aware OF objects, both subtle and gross. It's not a big deal really, it's what "is" anyways. Most just don't realize it, but when you do it's quite funny. The challenge is too not get sucked back into believing the story of "me". You know it (the person you appear to be) has an "apparent" transient reality, another words, it exists...it just aint real. So, you play your role, but not being identified with it, as you. So, you (awareness) will be "associated" with the hologram person, if you will, until the death of the body. To think you will trancend to some mystical place, is a satori dream, it will have you chasing "experiences" until the end of time, still believing in a story, even if it's a nicer, more comfortable story. It's still a story.

If you think the "apparent" person you appear to be, is going to go up in a puff smoke with experience when you awaken/realize your true nature and see from that perspective. You are sadly mistaken.

I don't know why I was tagged in this post? it has nothing to do with the post I asked you to elaborate on (ie, postive action). I'll assume you don't wish to expand on the original post I quoted. Fair enough.