Faceless

Why do want to “become” enlightened? In the honest observation of that question you may understand why you are not free. You will see that the very question “how to become” is responsible for ones sense of lacking in the first place. Instead of looking to thought “how to”, understand what the underlying problem is through understanding the self/thought. And in that one will not set the aim low by merely pursuing the idea of “enlightenment”, but will by far surpass any mental/emotional construction that time (the psychological entity who seeks to become) has put together.

Why does one want to “become” enlightened anyway?? Has one ever considered that the reason was not “enlightened” was percisly because they desired to be?? And if they considered the above, would they see the essential root barrier that prevented that desired state of arival? Maybe if one understood why the self/thought sought after the idea of enlightenment, one could also realize the necessary route about going about that particular accomplishment. Again, why does one seek enlightenment?? What is it that causes this wanting, desiring, lusting after, and striving for? Maybe in understanfing that, one would see where one must apply there attention. This just seems like a much more intelligent way to approach such a question. Instead of looking for a way, an answer, a method, one could instead apply all ones energy and attention to understanding the underlying problem that prevented one from such a target in becoming an actuality. Just a thought

It is quite obvious indeed. All an example of how thought/self measures and compares to maintain a certain level of psychological self affirmation and validation.

The only way to understand another is to understand the conditioned nature of thought. Which means to understand oneself deeply without theory’s, conceptualizations, and philosophical inventions of thought that influence the way in which we observe and understand ourselves. There is always the inherent limitation in attempting to see what is actual in oursleves and others, when looking through the eyes of the past (experience, knowledge, memory) We must remeber thought is always old and never new. To meet the newness of the now, with that of the old, is a futile attempt to capture that which is limitless with that which is limited. The fragment (thought) can never capture that which is whole (the dynamic nature of now)

Well said indeed. Spot on. Bringing to light how we formulate self images and images of others in accordance to our own particular accumulation of knowledge. What a great post @robdl

All an interpretation of thought. Thought cuts things into opposites, differentiates, fragments, and so on. If there is No thought, no such interpretation of polarity would be. Infact anything relative (comparable, measured) is a movement of thought. Its fine to speak relatively and use thought in practical, functional, technological ways... but only as long as we don’t make silly mistakes as to say goodness and evil are one and same. Truth is not relative.

Its only in the field of thought that we create these opposites... But Love (goodness) has no opposite. Love and goodness are not contained within the movement thought. Its only when the dualistic movement of mind ends that those qualities of truth become actual. Truth and love are one and the same movement of goodness. If evil is, Love (goodness) is not.

Of course... In the total and holistic understanding of disorder is born a direct action of order. We generally seek answers to psychological problems instead of understanding problems. We want a quick psychological fix. To escape the fact of disorder of the self and seek an idea (abstraction) of order “self improvement” is to attempt to create order out of already existing disorder. If we look at this very carefully that will see that order can never be cultivated from disorder. So it’s about facing and understanding the disorder(the fact) Not escaping disorder to (the idea) of order. To move away from the fact is to avoid the fact. This is what thought does, it resists (what is) actually happening and invents that which brings about psychological security. A defensive/reactionary movement of self. But any movement away from what is implies an escape from fear. To escape fear nourishes fear. Where there is fear illusion, delusion, self deception will continue to manifest insecurity and therefore disorder.

Yes, thought will cling to abstraction and attribute to itself that it has done otherwise. In that illusion one will continue to seek security in the illusion of self improvement. To end the illusory quest of the impermanent self seeking permanence ceases to act. In this one will see the falsity of cultivating psychological growth. And therefore will actually be much more psychologically stable. In fact when all the finite energy one wasted on cultivating psychological growth wnds, one will bring about infinite energy to live a holy (whole) life. Dont get me wrong there is nothing wrong with improving ones life. But I’m speaking psychologically; the attempt to cultivate growth in order to capture and maintain psychological security. This will only nourish psychological insecurity as all that is a movement of fear. To act in any way in accordance to fear all action will be contradictory, conflictual, divisive, and one hell of way to waste a life. @robdl you are one sharp dude. Thanks for your great questions and wisdom.

Precisely...well said.

Thought seeking security in thought is the root of all the worlds suffering.

Yes esteem without all the movement of fear. As in pleasure, gratification, fulfillment, satisfaction, validation, self affirmation, and so on. This would be esteem not influenced by the self that seeks psychological security. Instead this would be Esteem influenced by order/wholeness. Virtue.

What he means is to improve yourself psychologically is futile. Psychological growth is sham. Any attempt to use thought to improve the psyche only causes further contradiction, conflict, and disorder. To bring in thought (the cause of psychological insecurity/disorder) to end psychological insecurity/disorder is futile. In this he was right. Although this is easier said than done. This is where choiceless passivity (the cessation of positve and negative action as the self) is essential.

Bingo. Allan watts pointing out all the contradiction in self improvement. Only in the absence of all that is there love/compassion.

Indeed...Virtue of those who are holy embody order. In that order manifests itself physically and psychologically making for a life of physical/psychological vigor and longevity. Also, when we see that there is no division between oneself and another, we see that one individual is influencing the stream of human consciousness and physical evolution of mankind as well. Each one of us influences the way in which man kind lives and interrelates with themselves, others, and the world. In this mankind will collectively live more holistically integrated and physically robust lives. Anyone who views themselves as an “independent entity”(ego), that will die and enter into the “the kingdom of heaven” as an isolated and alienated spirt is bound to live an unholy life and betray the gift of the present moment. When fear dictates every action in ones life, one will remain moving and acting according to the divisive notion of the i and other. When one acts in accordance to the false idea that one is an independent entity who is alien to the world and others, one will continue to put off incarnating now in this life. Do we see the importance to incarnate now, instead of “next life” ??? When we see that the “next life” is another movement of time/mind, and a dualistic assumption that only an ego(thought) conjures up, we then see that now is all the ever is. The beauty of death which is life, is to incarnate now. As now is all there is. Anything not of now is of the imagination.

This is all a movement of the ego. An escape from what is. Understanding oursleves with the accumulation of teachings such as non duality, idealism, quantum mechanics, spiral dynamics, and other products of thought is what prevents self understanding. If all of this has had failed you, start from scratch in a whole different direction. Instead of going left this time go right. If we understand the actual problem the answer will come from the understanding. But to search for an answer through abstraction (learn about non duality, idealism, quantum mechanics, spiral dynamics, and such) is to not understand what is actually happening in ourselves. This is merely seeing ourselves through the eyes/thoughts of concepts, theory’s, and so on. Negate all compulsion to seek self understanding in abstraction, and look at yourself without all that. Without choice and condemnation. To look at oneself without the burden of the past, the conditioned nature of thought/ the thinker. Choiceless passivity.

The main thing is to see that there is no psychological evolution. To end the illusion that has been generated by the notion of being an seperate and independent i. To see that the thinker is the thought, and the experience and the experiencer are one and the same movement of thought. And that the movement of thought seeks security in its own movement of thinking. An illusion seeking security in illusion. When we see that to seek security by cultivating an illusion (psychological growth) only leads to psychological insecurity there is bound to be conflict. To cultivate psychological growth is a perpetual movement of fear seeking pleasure. A movement of desire. To be time bound. A slave to thought.

Excellent As in psychological time?

@Saumaya You write your book yet?

Indeed. Truth is total (whole) unless all the movement of self ends truth is not. Because self can only see in fragments/parts. Movement of self is limited. When that limitation ends..Truth is And truth sees the whole.

An illusion but a fact. This relates to my question @Saumaya what do you think, subtle identification?

Which brings me back to my original post. If one sees this fact, why does one still move dualistically? Could it be we are still subtly identifying? The question of holy embodiment

Correct There is no identification psychologically at all. The psychological entity is a movement of thought itself. So that would be absurd to identify as the entity. Well to one who sees that.

Thought is needed as movement to function. Not psychologicall though. That’s what I am referring to. I would only use the word belief to refer to the psychological field. Where the self is attached to (experiece, knowledge, memory) and looking to evade fear. Self being attached to itself.

This was interesting. Do you see that experiences are influenced by conceptualizations? The very reason we understand an experience is because that experience was the result of thought(conceptualizations, theory’s, and such. Pretty cool huh