SOUL

Your time movement attachment is showing........ I don't need any of it, nobody really does, that's the point.

It appears you complicate the conceptualization which can be a common occurrence in spiritualist circles and the very point of this thread. The complication of these things makes for endless hours of 'work' that people think needs to be done. I'm prefer clarity and simple, be present, aware and at peace in just being. Which is why I don't spend much time on forums like this, it's too complicated and people are attached to their complex conceptualizations.

"Time" and our "perception of time" are distinct from each other but both contribute to the manifestation of self in our consciousness.....whether we think it or not. There are other animals with a naturally occurring self identity but there is no conclusive evidence that they have 'thought' like we do.

@tsuki Hello! Good to see you again.

Any distinction is made by awareness of them, ego wants to collectivize it into self identity. Though, by being aware of the distinction in them we can be clear of entanglements to it.

When you start talking about movement I don't know what you mean. I've asked you to explain it before and your explanation was even less revealing so I'm not going to be able to reply with anything useful. My apologies.

Such is the nature of expression, so be it.

Time doesn't require our perception of it to be perpetuated, but our perception of time, as linear instances of happenings is what creates our experience of the 'self' in consciousness.

That is why a mentioned the differing uses of words, let's not get stuck on words, let's instead be aware of the message. There is an accumulation of experience, there is also a persona of self conscious and there is the awareness of them. These are distinct yet are whole and all of this creates our consciousness regardless of whatever words one prefers to use for it.

Yes, it's good to see you as well. I'm not sure what you are apologizing for but there isn't anything or any need to. I was not offended or hurt by any of our discussions, I enjoyed them. Peace.

The 'seeker' is our personification of the awareness, the observer, which resides in consciousness. The accumulation of experience is what's observed, the self, which continues to be observed by awareness in the present moment. So the I, seeker, observer, awareness can be kept purified, so to speak, through our attention on the now, by being present in the moment. Allowing the 'observable' of accumulated experience to continue flowing without clinging to it. I know that people use words differently for different reasons and may not use them as I do but I'm just trying to illuminate the distinction between the observer and the observed in our consciousness, the seeker from the sought.

Well, my point was really about the prospect of time being a perceptual stumbling block to us being present, ironically. Being present in the moment is us being aware of the nature of time in it's absolute, the 'now'. The 'prospecting' as it were is us looking elsewhere, such as the future or past, other than the present. Yes, the looking to, the 'prospect', other than the present moment, the now, can reinforce a sense of separation. So, a notion of endless hours of practice to attain something that actually is always available to us in the present moment is creating the separation, it's 'prospecting' enlightenment instead of just being aware.....now.

Awakening takes no time, it's instantaneous and in fact, the prospect of time may actually hinder the seeker. It is simple, which isn't to suggest it's easy but it is simplicity in nature which can be difficult to manifest in practice. Awakening is like sitting on the highest mountain seeing the landscape all around from a vantage that cannot be paralleled, it doesn't take any effort to be viewing the world from that spot on top of the mountain. The 'work' is climbing the mountain, it is a challenge and is on the way to the perspective sought but isn't it in itself. All the methods and techniques filling books and seminars are teaching the climb but that mountain top perspective is always available in the present moment to our awareness seated at the top of the mountain in our consciousness.

It's the eons of natural world experience that has evolved manifesting in the mind with an ingrained subconscious ideology that one needs to sacrifice to attain. Transcending the self conditioning in our mind by just 'being present' is ultimately what we seek as the spontaneous expression of awareness in consciousness.

There are no universal methods that bring about clarity in consciousness and well being in life, it's an individually cultivated experience.

@Faceless You're stuck in a contradiction and don't have the clarity of awareness to recognize it even though I reveal it to you. I just wonder why you insist on teaching others this contradiction percrption and believe it to be "truth".

Well, "buddy" it appears you don't understand the clarity of awareness I have in revealing the contradictory nature of your complicated belief system.

You say it has nothing to do with philosophy but either you don't understand what philosophy is or you are ignorant of yourself philosophizing about all these ideas you purport to be the knower of. This is what you are doing, philosophizing about these ideas from an position of you knowing about them from 'going into them'. "Just takes honesty." Yet you carry all these ideas as an implied knower that you write here with you into the present moment. All the language, all the concepts and ideas, all the understanding gleaned from the past imposing itself on the present otherwise you wouldn't be on this forum writing all this. You wouldn't be able to because none of it would be possible without the remembrance of the past. "Just takes honesty." Yet you are conforming to your own ideas that you express profusely about on this forum and profess are the "truth".... yes, "just takes honesty". I thought you said it's freedom from the "knower" yet now it's "knowing"? So which is it? If there is knowing there is a knower. You are the one with all these complicated contradictions and conflicting words, ideas, concepts and philosophizing. If you were as free of accumulated content and conditioned mind so are being in silence you wouldn't be filling up this forum with all these words about your ideas and concepts. "Just takes honesty". If it's not complicated why do you have all these complicated contradicting and conflicting ideas and concepts you are using to explain someone that is so simple? "Just takes honesty" You say I don't know truth and it's not about knowing or experiencing truth yet here you are saying what is or isn't truth. So which is it? We don't know truth or you know what truth is or isn't? Yup, "just takes honesty". If there is no knower there is nobody to know so nothing to teach and nobody to learn but I suspect you will still be on this forum filling it up with your words on ideas and concepts telling others what is the "truth". "Just takes honesty". It is very simple, with simple awareness of the present moment and the clarity in that it is easy to see the convoluted and contradictory messages you reply with. If you truly had this space and silence you preach then so many complicated ideas and contradictory concepts wouldn't come out of you. Honest enough?

It depends on what one defines as "ego" but what one defines as "good" also plays a huge role in answering the question "can the ego be good?" That's quite a list of the most imponderable topics of philosophy and you are suggesting "one has to go into" all of those and more? Actually, one doesn't have to go into any of that to just be present in the moment, you are just foisting your personal opinion of what matters to you as being important for others, too. I have a sense of well being, peace and fulfillment in just being without the use of this complicated ideology of yours. Awakening and self awareness can be a very simple exercise that even the most simple minded individual can self examine from a simple perspective. So though your own more complicated perspective works for you it isn't any more of a "truth" than any other experience of it and there is no "has to go into" about it.

The insightful use of experience to bring a sense of well being in one's life.

You still don't get the nuance of my point or you are purposefully being obtuse so refuse to acknowledge it. Either way, that's ok, it's no bother to me.

What? Why do you think that?

@Outer I appreciate you proving my point for me, usually it isn't that easy. It takes just a few mins of that video to get to the point, the person SoA is citing suggests that 'cult thinking' is a 'psychological force' that brings on 'characteristics of behavior' he uses to call something a cult. Where does all of this 'authoritarian' control and belief take place? Within the individual because without the individual empowering it to be 'cultish' for them it has no force in their psychology to bring about behavior associated with it. Ironically, the video you provided explains how the four listed behaviors that are mentioned of compliance with a group, dependence on a leader, devaluing outsiders and avoiding dissent are all exhibited on this forum with much fervor. It seems that you are using a physical threshold of organization to be able to call something a cult without recognizing the power of the 'cultish thinking' present in the individual that brings about the control and belief. So yes, just in the first few mins that video you posted agrees that the subjectivity of group member's view of the group is the thing that makes for cultish thinking otherwise it has no psychological power of belief to control them to exhibit characteristics of behavior.

@Ether Um...ok

What?