Please Don't chase enlightenment.

[non_nothing]

6 minutes ago, purerogue said:

No and it does not bother me.

You'll die

[Strikr]

I always wanted a place where all the fun would be  

[Nahm]

@non_nothing @Jack RiverWhat would you say enlightenment is? (This thing you advise against seeking). 

[purerogue]

Just now, non_nothing said:

You'll die

Does not matter to me , I am long as being fine with fact that I will die, or that there will be no more me after this experience of life ends. 

 

[non_nothing]

14 minutes ago, Strikr said:

I always wanted a place where all the fun would be  

Welcome to Planet earth V1.0

 

13 minutes ago, Nahm said:

@non_nothing @Jack RiverWhat would you say enlightenment is? (This thing you advise against seeking). 

I've already pointed out in the first post what most thinks of, personally It's getting to know one's true self. The happening, the one, the flow, the all.

[Nahm]

1 hour ago, non_nothing said:

Welcome to Planet earth V1.0

 

I've already pointed out in the first post what most thinks of, personally It's getting to know one's true self. The happening, the one, the flow, the all.

How did you do that? What did you find, ultimately?

[Strikr]

could be more than spin

don't you think ?  

[Jack River]

2 hours ago, Nahm said:

@non_nothing @Jack RiverWhat would you say enlightenment is? (This thing you advise against seeking). 

Well dude

It would be silly for me to advise and for others to accept or deny anything. I am just referring to freedom from “psychological evolution” dude. 

The ending of that self loop makes for a free mind to explore. Then we don’t limit exploration/observation to the notion and “attainment of enlightenment”. 

Namean brah??

 

 

 

Edited November 26, 2018 by Jack River

[Nahm]

@Jack River I do. When you reference “attainment of enlightenment”, what are you talking about? 

[Jack River]

30 minutes ago, Nahm said:

@Jack River I do. When you reference “attainment of enlightenment”, what are you talking about? 

Good questions dude. 

“Enlightenment” tends to be a notion that has been accepted through time/thought and the self clings to the idea and pursues that idea/notion. So the destination seems to become more important than the exploration/observation. The destination corrupts the exploration/observation. Looking for a way out means I am not interested in the exploration/observation but instead to outcome of a self that “becomes enlightened”(psychological safety). 

We seem to take in ideas from the past(thought) and pursue those ideas to become something other than what we are that moment(escape). We seek what we have learned about enlightenment to end our pain, suffering, discontent. This itself is why we suffer. We are always looking to time (future) to solve psychological issues and that seems to be the root of those issues. We dis identify with what-is actually presently and we seek the idea, which is psychological evolution(time). We disidentify with “our experiences” which is the same as identifying with them. It’s in both cases a “movement of me/the chooser. 

That’s why I say the self is the path. The self is the means. It’s pretty gnarly fosho dude.

[Ananta]

@Joseph Maynor That is a very good Tolle video. I hope ppl here are watching it. It is the truth, as I understand it. ?

[Nahm]

@Jack River What if that’s a smoke screen, so to speak?  What if enlightenment is not a “notion”, or an “idea” at all? What if everything else is an idea? What if it’s not a “destination” at all? What if it’s a way in, and not a “way out”?     What if enlightenment is so far beyond “psychological safety”, that thought deludes us by categorizing seeking there, so that we don’t seek, - thus falsely experiencing the very “psychological safety” via nullification? 

What if that it is any of those things is the smokescreen? Could thinking be so sneaky, as to convince us not to even begin?   But then, if we didn’t find out for ourselves, in our own direct experience - wouldn’t we just be believing someone else, or be believing our own thoughts? 

What if “seeking what we have learned about enlightenment”, is not what seeking actually is?  What if the suffering is actually from missing what is in actuality, a smokescreen, and the absence of suffering is in actuality the result of denying one’s own desire?  Could a delusion of this magnitude itself be a way of not living life to the fullest, but veiled by a false wisdom of not taking the first step?

How could someone know these things with absolute certainty without seeking, given that they currently, honestly, don’t know? 

 

 

 

[Strikr]

Just now, Nahm said:

@Jack River What if that’s a smoke screen, so to speak?  What if enlightenment is not a “notion”, or an “idea” at all? What if everything else is an idea? What if it’s not a “destination” at all? What if it’s a way in, and not a “way out”?     What if enlightenment is so far beyond “psychological safety”, that thought deludes us by categorizing seeking there, so that we don’t seek, - thus falsely experiencing the very “psychological safety” via nullification? 

What if that it is any of those things is the smokescreen? Could thinking be so sneaky, as to convince us not to even begin?   But then, if we didn’t find out for ourselves, in our own direct experience - wouldn’t we just be believing someone else, or be believing our own thoughts? 

What if “seeking what we have learned about enlightenment”, is not what seeking actually is?  What if the suffering is actually from missing what is in actuality, a smokescreen, and the absence of suffering is in actuality the result of denying one’s own desire?  Could a delusion of this magnitude itself be a way of not living life to the fullest, but veiled by a false wisdom of not taking the first step?

How could someone know these things with absolute certainty without seeking, given that they currently, honestly, don’t know? 

 

 

 

that's a fairly good explanation nahm, nothing to review here

[Nahm]

@Strikr meh.

[Strikr]

2 minutes ago, Nahm said:

@Strikr meh.

sbeh.

[purerogue]

5 minutes ago, Nahm said:

@Jack River What if that’s a smoke screen, so to speak?  What if enlightenment is not a “notion”, or an “idea” at all? What if everything else is an idea? What if it’s not a “destination” at all? What if it’s a way in, and not a “way out”?     What if enlightenment is so far beyond “psychological safety”, that thought deludes us by categorizing seeking there, so that we don’t seek, - thus falsely experiencing the very “psychological safety” via nullification? 

What if that it is any of those things is the smokescreen? Could thinking be so sneaky, as to convince us not to even begin?   But then, if we didn’t find out for ourselves, in our own direct experience - wouldn’t we just be believing someone else, or be believing our own thoughts? 

What if “seeking what we have learned about enlightenment”, is not what seeking actually is?  What if the suffering is actually from missing what is in actuality, a smokescreen, and the absence of suffering is in actuality the result of denying one’s own desire?  Could a delusion of this magnitude itself be a way of not living life to the fullest, but veiled by a false wisdom of not taking the first step?

How could someone know these things with absolute certainty without seeking, given that they currently, honestly, don’t know? 

 

 

 

I will give you one dilemma, if you associate everything has to do with thoughts with ego and to reach Enlightenment you have to give up on idea of idea of thought, how can you have idea after no idea? 

[ivankiss]

One could spend lifetimes proving or disproving enlightenment exists. There is no such a thing. That is what it isn't. One has to know one does not know at all, with certainty.

[Jack River]

1 hour ago, Nahm said:

What if that’s a smoke screen, so to speak?  What if enlightenment is not a “notion”, or an “idea” at all?

First off, great questions dude. 

that’s the point dude. “selfs” do not seem to understand when an idea or notion is being pursued. The self does not even see that its idea/notion of “enlightenment” and “the self” are all part of the same movement of time. This makes for a problematic situation. The self already seperates itself from its accumulated ideas/notions. As long as that is the case it is implicit that the self will pursue the idea/notion. This will happen unconsciously. It’s the way self moves/operates. 

1 hour ago, Nahm said:

What if everything else is an idea? What if it’s not a “destination” at all? What if it’s a way in, and not a “way out”?     What if enlightenment is so far beyond “psychological safety”, that thought deludes us by categorizing seeking there, so that we don’t seek, - thus falsely experiencing the very “psychological safety” via nullification? 

fosho. That is still seeking psychological security. That is the same movement of time. One of the many subtleties of the self/thought. That is still a reactionary movement away from what-is(attachment/resistance/identification) and action influenced by that. 

 

1 hour ago, Nahm said:

What if that it is any of those things is the smokescreen? Could thinking be so sneaky, as to convince us not to even begin?

yep?

You got it dude. Again a reaction. We are then going into the exploration with a fixed notion either way. I shouldn’t because of this, or I should because of that. If there is no holistic insight into thought/self then we will act by motives/knowledge/desire. To come to a conclusion that is influenced by thought itself is the lack of freedom that I speak of. To corrupt the exploration. We don’t go into it with I know or don’t know. It’s a freedom without he chooser/thought.

1 hour ago, Nahm said:

What if “seeking what we have learned about enlightenment”, is not what seeking actually is?

That’s the point again. The self/thought will narrow its scope/interest by pursuing an idea. It’s like going into a observation with a fixed eye. Only seeing what we have our radar on, as opposed to seeing other possibilities. We will then miss the possibility of the whole and limit the observation to a small part.This will also lead to illusion and conflict. That precious holistic insight will never come when we have fixed notion/assumptions. Thought and its tendency to cut what was otherwise whole into parts/fragments.

1 hour ago, Nahm said:

What if “seeking what we have learned about enlightenment”, is not what seeking actually is?  What if the suffering is actually from missing what is in actuality, a smokescreen, and the absence of suffering is in actuality the result of denying one’s own desire?  Could a delusion of this magnitude itself be a way of not living life to the fullest, but veiled by a false wisdom of not taking the first step?

Fosho. The first step is the last step. Instead of acting with a fixed notion already in mind we are free to climb the mountain. To explore first “explorer” without taking that first step with preconceived notions as its motivation/inspiration. Freedom to explore without the veil  altering the exploration. 

1 hour ago, Nahm said:

How could someone know these things with absolute certainty without seeking, given that they currently, honestly, don’t know? 

I would say..Don’t presuppose any quality about the journey/exploration. Instead start with my own limitations/barriers that will block “knowing”/seeing. 

There is a big difference between seeking, and seeking “enlightenment”. 

Seeking of itself to me means no preconceptions/presuppositions/no motive in either direction that influences what lies on the other side of the mountain. 

Freedom to seek is necessary dude??

Everything I write is directed to a self, it’s nature, barriers, limits, that will cause many years of conflict/suffering. Seeking without freedom causes this constant year after year striving. The up and down effect of now you see it, now you don’t. The dog chasing its tail dilemma. 

Again, Great question brah. You rock?

Edited November 26, 2018 by Jack River

[Nahm]

@Jack River Would you say enlightenment is the same as the realization that there is no separate self? 

[Forestluv]

1 hour ago, Jack River said:

“selfs” do not seem to understand when an idea or notion is being pursued.

Would you have the understanding that a self was pursuing ideas it presents in this thread? Ideas of self, thoughts, movements in time etc. are all being entertained by a self component that has yet to be realized?