Faceless

For the i to seek truth is self deception. If the i seeks ultimate reality that is itself an illusion. The i Seeking an ultimate awakening/enlightenment is an illusion/delusion. Experience implies thought/things. Nothingness implies a cessation of experience.

Mumbo jumbo ?

Anyway I’m going to the ocean?

I don’t think so Joseph. You are looking for answer. You don’t want to figure out the probem. I have presented you with some important things to look into. You are playing the game of debate. Seems very obvious that you don’t want to explore yourself. You meet each problem with your own bias and corrupt logic. If you haven’t understood the mechanism that this logic stems from you will never be able to commune with that corrupted logic/rationalizing distorting what is being said. Start with learning and observing yourself/thought.. Until that is done there is absolutely no foundation for rational (unbiased) thinking. And no not “rationalism” Quite different.

@Joseph Maynor and @Etagnwo If you don’t see the significance then that’s it. It’s done. Carry on with your life. That simple.

Lol I cannot awaken anyone. ‘I’ cannot awaken “I” That’s my point. You guys are not seeing the deep down root of all of this. Its very subtle. I think one must understand there own inward movement. See it actually. Until then this will not make sense.

Im fairly certain there is no easier way to explain what can not be explained. This is very complex and demands total attention without resistance preventing communication. If we don’t understand ourselves we cannot be attentive to another. all I see is resistence, which is why I usually respond with this guy??‍♂️

You can’t share truth. Especially with one who is listening with ears and seeing with eyes what’s being communicated with an interpretation of the past (thought) The only way to truth is through self understanding, the understanding of the movement of thought.

Oh deer, ? Thats cute anna1 Anyways I wish you the best??

No-thing gets me out of bed. That’s the beauty of it.

@Anna1 Do you see what I mean about reward?

We only do things that benefit us Psychologically, which is where the very problem arises. The self seeks a reward. Its the movement of this i that prevents one from seeing what is.

And thinking is not bad. It has its function. But psychologically it has none.

I’m not telling anyone to stop psychological time. That is a movement of psychological time. There is no understanding ones true nature until all such movement ceases. This whole reward system motive is the reasom psychological time does not cease.

Do nothing implies no movement of will, desire, volition which is all the movement of the self/thought.

If there is no movement of the knower/the known/thought/the thinker, what does that imply Joseph?

Can you observe free of the knower and all its accumulated content (the past). This is the beauty of living. To be headless To observer without the movement of the becoming or not becoming, outwardly and inwardly. To be choicelessly passive (without any compulsion to choose as the chooser) as Krishnamurti has discussed before.

as @Anna1said The problem, imo, with this is that once you're in the "now", then now what? You can't stay there indefinately and when you start using thoughts and memory again to function in the world you'll think you "lost" your "presence". Its to simply use thought when it is needed. And when we don’t need thought, there is no need for thought. There is absolutely no need for thought psychologically. Thought is a tool. When we are not using that tool. Why the need for it to keep operating. Freedom is only freedom when thought does not compulsively enter into the psychological realm.

This is a movement of thought/self/duality The knower who seperates awarness from thought stories. Dualistic movement of a doer using volition to satisfy its own compulsion and to satisfy desire in the pursuit of pleasure, gratification, satisfaction. Perpetual seeking the illusionary nature of psychological time.

There is no philosophy. That is the point. It’s seeing the futility of philosophical conceptualization. Just sharing with others the significance of self understanding. To point out contradictions and invoke interests that may bring about a more direct approach.

We can only point to the significance of understanding the self. That’s it. Not according to ideas and so on. As that is understanding oneself according to the past (thought) which is not understanding oneself at all.

No Just to simply investigate yourself. In this investigation all ideas are negated and the fact reveals itself. Facts are where embodiment arises, not ideas. This must be seen for oneself. I only can invoke interest. Point to. Point to the necessity of exploring oneself free of ones own accumulated bias and prejudices. And the suspension of (choice influenced by that same movement of self) All this can be found within one own inward being. No need to bring abstraction into this. As that is the very root of the problem

Remeber there can never be embodiment in accordance to a theory/abstraction....As that implies duality. If we explore inwardly very deep this will become quite obvious. Its a theory to anyone who sees it abstractly (not in ones self)

That’s where all conflict sets in.. when the past “being static” tries to solve psychological problems that arise in the present now “which is dynamic”

It’s not a theory to me. Theory implies somthing abstract (of thought) This is to cut the tether of thought all together. Not thoughts, but the movement of thought as in a cessation of the self (knowledge, experience, memory) which is “static” witch approaches the now “dynamic” with the accumulated content of the past that imposes itself on the now and projects itself into the future. Did if you ever read my nature of experience thread?