Faceless

when you're hopeless?? When you are truly “hopeless” congratulations ?? The ending of fear, (the i) seeking psychological security in time.

Great questions... Nope, that would imply dependence, attachment, a seeking security in the image in which you have constructed. If one has an image of themselves that image is inevitably projected onto others. If that image is rejected, dismissed as unimportant, and so on we will feel opposed, attacked, and will cause a reaction of fear. In that fear we defend. Love cannot be when this is the fact. Where there is a self image that implies we form images about others...where there is an image there is no relationship-Love.

As long as there is contradiction (self seeking psychological security), which means conflict, relationship will remain dependent on conditions. Which is not a relationship. Love cannot be when this conflict-fear of escaping conflict-fear is in movement.

Depends if there is Love. Just because a mother gives birth to a child doesn’t mean there is love there. Be amazed the subtlety of conditioned love, disguised as unconditional love ?

Yes sir.... Love is not some-“thing” to be cultivated, that implies time. The i “time”, who perpetually seeks security in psychological time, is incapable of Love. Love is freedom, undound by time. Love is not yours or mine, love is when the you, and the I are not.

Find out buddy.

And love has no opposite. Just like “goodness” has no opposite. Only we create the opposite with dualistic thinking. Oh snap!!. Cats out of the bag ? ? ?

hehe Intelligent action that is whole.

They cannot co exist. Love is only in FREEDOM without that of the conditioned consciousness as the I who seeks psychological security in time.

I wouldn’t worry about wha others say. You don’t know if they have awakened. That would be an assumption. Protecting the body, feeding the body is intelligent action. Whole-infinite action Feeding the ego is a movement of fear, therefore an unintelligent response-reaction to thought. All fueled by the contradiction, confusion, and conflict that is perpetuated by the false notion that the experiencer is seperate from that which it experiences. This is action born of limitation, the finite movement of thought. All the result of not understanding the nature of ego-thought. Keep it simple my man

Indeed. The thing is this movement of the i doesn’t see its own movement of fear seeking security in time. And in so doing, nourishes the movement of volition-will-thought, without being aware it has done so. So it becomes a movement of self perpetuation.

Start with what is actually happening in yourself. Is that happening seperate than “the you?” Doesn’t matter what I think my friend, explore into it yourself. Ask yourself, why is it so difficult to remain empty-nothing? Why must we identify with things? You will see the significance of what is said when you have seen this all holistically.

Indeed As long as we see “it” as being seperate from “the i” this will seem difficult.

I never pursued enlightenment. And as I see it now, I feel to seek “enlightenment” is just another positive manifestation of ego. Plus if we seek an idea, any result will be narrowed down by that limited idea of what we think enlightenment would be. The way I see it, in the ending of the conditioned content as the i, what may lie beyond will be waiting. But not to be concerned with that. We cant seek what what don’t, and cannot know. Start with what is the case, start close to home. With fear, sorrow, pain, pleasure, identification, and so on.

If you see the significance of what was said, all these questions become quite obvious. I would just explore more into this division-duality that takes place. Its much easier to start nearer to the conditioned consciousness as t is, instead of accumulating ideas that have been invented by thought Is this a movement of thought? If the conditioned consciousness as the i in time has not ended, how can one be sure that is the case, and not just another figment of the imagination? Just a couple questions we can ask ourselves.

The seeker is one and the same process as the seeking. If there is still a seeking, one still thinks they are seperate from the seeking itself. Self perpetuation of “the i” who seeks security in time. The notion of division-duality between the experiencer and the experience remains. Therefore conciousness is still bound by its content as the independent i. Unless that content ends, the i am nothingness notion remains an idea born of things. Sneaky sneaky thought, it will get you ?

Are you separate from your beliefs? Are you seperate from fear? Or is belief, fear, the you, all one and the same movement of the past (experience, knowledge, memory) ??

Yeah. I have a friend with the same situation. Conforming to an ideal, religious belief, and so on implies identification. In identification implies fear. When there is fear, selfishness is a consequence of that.

If you have any type of image about yourself that you identify with such as being, (50% orange 30% green 20% yellow), there is no possible way to have a relationship with anyone-thing. You have already isolated-divided yourself from others. This is the divisive nature of thought-measure at work that compares to self sustain the psyche. In this you have built a wall around yourself. If there is no image there is no separation-distinction between you and other, then there is relationship.

@who chit ??

Great questions indeed. If the (the self) is looking at something in the now, that looking is being interpreted by the past itself. Therefore the newness of “now” is diminished-reduced, and therefore we have imposed the old onto the new. We have projected what has been and what we want to be, onto the fact of what is. We could then say that presence is, when “the i” is not. @robdlThose are the kind of questions that bring about presence-awareness-holistic observation.

Any type of identification wth any “thing” is a subtle form of tribalism-division. When you form an image of yourself as being “pink” you then create an opposition to “tan”. You have then divided yourself from another. In division is the self sustaining movement of ego(to measure) or compare yourself with another. A defensive movement of fear. Do you see that? As long as you form an m image about yourself as being “the turquoise rabbi”?, you have already prevented the beauty and necessity of relationship from flowering. To identify yourself with any-thing (idea-concept), and to identify-judge others in accordance to that self imposed image (abstraction), is to ‘isolate, alienate, and fragment’ yourself away from the whole of man kind and the environment. This is merely a movement of fear expressing itself in the pattern of measure (comparison) which obviously implies fear, (the compulsion to self-sustain the continuity of ego.) A nourishing-perpetuation of psychological becoming. Where there is this movement of measure-comparison, there is the inevitable fear, and where there is fear, we form images, and when we from images in accordance to that fear, there can never be RELATIONSHIP. Life is relationship, so if there is no relationship actually, life then has no significance.

Life demands action. Question what quality of action? Do we want to act incomplelty, moving in accordance to fear seeking the illusory psychologically security, or do we want to act completely(holistically) which comes only in absolute freedom? Is that so ? Have you gone into that in depth? Or is this a hope, assumption, fear seeking an answer in the illusory movement of psychological time? My original post was only to provide questions for another to explore. If we only seek a means to end problems, we will miss the point all together. To me, it’s not about seeking answers to solve problems (a means to an end) as that implies effort-ego, but instead understanding the problem, in which produces it’s own action-answer. Ultimate psychological freedom is not the result of fear seeking to end fear, but the understanding and seeing the futility in so doing. In that understanding-seeing is the ending of fear, as the i who seeks security in time. I’m not sure how far you have gone into thought-self. I would continue learning about that. In that understanding all such questions are obvious to one who has explored in depth. If you do that, this will all be quite apparent. If you put all your energy into this within months you could find yourself in living a life of complete freedom from time-self. If you continue to try and cut away one little piece at a time, which is what thought-ego does, you will get caught up year after year in the never ending process of psychological growth, which in actuality perpetuates and nourishes the ego. Anyway, there is nothing wrong with wanting to improve your life, the problem comes in when we depend on “improving” to satisfy psychologically needs. We do need food, shelter, to take care of our families, perhaps help others we know in relationship, and so on, but if you have to feed the ego (imagined entity) just to maintain psychological order, then all action from that ego is then limited, narrow, incomplete, and born of fear. As long as that is the case there is no FREEDOM, but slavery that has disguised itself as FREEDOM. Again, please don’t ever take anyone’s word for it, especially mine, but explore into the self-thought and go beyond once you have done so. Only the ego tells us we cannot go about it oursleves, but it’s clear the ego doesn’t want to end itself, so why would we want to listen to something with an opposing agenda? Remember thought, the ego, is not seperate from you, “the ego and the you” are one and the same movements of thought-time. I am not against personal growth when it comes to practical-functional affairs. Building a nice life for oneself is an intelligent thing to do. But if we are influenced by fear to find a life purpose-meaning, then what we choose will ultimately be conditioned by that very fear, and therefore that implies there was no freedom to discover that purpose-meaning at all. Then that purpose and meaning was the result of psychological insecurity. Freedom comes first, and in that ultimate freedom there is no fear When we are absolutely free, meaning and purpose are born of that complete and infinite action, which is Freedom. It doesn’t end there either, freedom is the in the beginning. In this freedom lies the sacred, the timeless realm, the ending of the conditioned conciousness as we know it, consciousness with no-thing in it. Observation without measure. In this there is beauty, joy, and a movement in which is totally creative(new and fresh). Or as I refer to it, to be Headless? Very Important !!! But, we must start nearer to what is actually the case in our daily lives, which is what is the case in ourselves now. Start with fear, understand it, start with pleasure, why we seek it, start with psychological suffering, why we escape it, and so on. Start by understanding the self, and that which the self is born from, which is thought. Anyway, that’s the way I see it buddy. It’s up to you to how you want to go about living life free of conflict. As long and there is psychological conflict, there can be no beauty. And life without beauty, why bother.??‍♂️

For “the me” (experience, knowledge, memory), every second is “birth” and every second is “death” The art of living is continuously dying and being born. To Live there must be death, and to die there must be living. To die we must understand the significance of living, and in actually understanding living, we understand the significance of dying. These are really one movement of creativity. Without death nothing is creative, and without creativity, there is no sacred.

Is there a such thing as Ego or psychological growth?? Why do we strive to psychologically grow?? Do we seek security in this idea of growth as the i, to evade the fact of insecurity and impermanence of the i?? Is there a psychological “i” in which can grow? Is there any permanence as “the i” at all? Does this perpetual striving to maintain psychological security nourish division-duality as the i, and therefore cause only contradiction, confusion, conflict?? And if so, does not the existence of this contradiction, confusion, conflict, only further manifest itself as fear resisting its own movement as fear? If there is any form of psychological fear, can there be psychological security?? So, is the desire to seek psychological growth as the ego simply an illusion seeking security in an illusion?? And if we continually chase the illusion that psychological security can be captured by cultivation of thought, doesn’t this actually cause that very reality of psychological insecurity?? So again, is there psychological growth, or is there only an ending of all of the above?? As long as there is disorder (contradiction, confusion, conflict, fear, psychologically, can there be freedom? And without freedom from all that, is “psychological growth” actually psychological slavery?? Questions one can ask themselves, if they want to go deep into the structure of psychological becoming (time).