We are stuck in a self created prison

[Spaceofawareness]

We take there to be a world out there, which there most likely is, but from the point of view of awareness, we are trapped in an imagined world, inextricably bound, like a prison. 

Whats worse, who we take ourselves to be is also imagined, really there is no one here in this prison of the world, there is just the impression of someone feeling like they are in a world, reacting to this world, and responding to their imagined body. All that needs to be realised is that this one who takes themselves to be imprisoned is just a play on the screen of awareness.

Even though it has been seen that the one who took themself to be the body is not actually the body, but is awareness of a sense of a body, and that the world only exists as an impression or a play on a screen, now this one has been reinserted back into the movie, with the memory of being outside it. So this one now feels stuck inside the movie, whereas before they did not even know this was a movie, they took it to be reality from a naive perspective. This one also realises that the very feeling of being stuck anywhere is still another play on the screen, but until it can be seen from outside of the movie again, it still takes itself to be in the movie, on a deeper less conscious level. 

The absurdity of it all begins to dawn on the character, but the character still feels it needs to do something to get out of the movie, and yet, what needs to happen is to realise on that deeper less conscious level that the actor cannot actually do anything, as actions are just happening on a screen, being observed by awareness, and the actor is just an illusion or collection of appearances and ideas about cause and effect. There are so many ties to cut, so many roots to be pulled before this one can be shown to be false, and yet from an observers perspective it is perfectly clear. From that perspective there is nothing to be done because there is no one there to do anything, there is only the appearance of doing, before the screen shows the observer it’s true nature. The lie it has been believing, even though it has been told it is a lie. It’s still too close to the screen to see the screen itself. Just a few steps back and the screen and the movie can be seen, but the stepping back is still a happening is it not? Or is that also on another screen?

Confusion begins to cloud the screen now, and weariness comes. Not today.

Perhaps tomorrow. Or one year, or ten, or who knows how long. As long as it is remembered that there is a screen, this one will keep this faith. But what holds this one back from seeing it’s true nature? How can one take a step without really moving? 

[EnlightenmentBlog]

Dead on. Had chills down my back.

[Jacobsrw]

This was beautifully put. However, I would say that the prison is only maintained by ego. Awareness is free. It has no boundaries. It is at all places at the same time.

Edited May 27, 2020 by Jacobsrw

[Someone here]

Where is the screen? 

[Jacobsrw]

@Someone here the screen is the transparency of awareness through which your experience is known. You can’t see the screen because it is transparent you. Yet you require it to know anything at all.

Edited May 27, 2020 by Jacobsrw

[Someone here]

5 minutes ago, Jacobsrw said:

@Someone the screen is the transparency of awareness through which your experience is known. You can’t see the screen because it is transparent you. Yet you require it to know anything at all.

What's more real.. The screen or the movie? 

[Jacobsrw]

@Someone here Think about your question. If the movie requires a screen from which to be displayed, what do you think is more fundamental?

The movie is nothing but a product of the screen. In fact, the movie is  completely made up of the screen. Without the screen the movie could not exist.

Just as is for us with consciousness. Without conscious we could not exist, the screen of our experience is but completely made up of consciousness.

[Someone here]

4 minutes ago, Jacobsrw said:

@Someone here Think about your question. If the movie requires a screen from which to be displayed, what do you think is more fundamental?

The movie is nothing but a product of the screen. In fact, the movie is  completely made up of the screen. Without the screen the movie could not exist.

Just as is for us with consciousness. Without conscious we could not exist, the screen of our experience is but completely made up of consciousness.

Yet the movie content is the only thing that can appear. The screen as the screen in its purest form is not anything.  You could call it "pure potential".  But we only know from it what is manifested yet.  What does pure potential as pure potential look like? 

[Member]

The actor is no longer an actor when he realizes is the screen.

1 hour ago, Someone here said:

Where is the screen? 

Where are you?

[Jacobsrw]

@Someone here you just answered your own question.

Pure potential most be nothing and everything at the same time. To be one thing limits it from being another so to be pure infinitude the screen must impart all possibilities without preference to either one. That is why the screen is an efficient metaphor.

Awareness must be all as all relies upon it but it must also be none as none fully represent it.

[Member]

5 minutes ago, Jacobsrw said:

Awareness must be all as all relies upon it but it must also be none as none fully represent it.

Why do you talk about awareness as being something separate from you?

[Jacobsrw]

@Member You misunderstand. Awareness imparts all that is perceived. As such, awareness is both what is seen and the seer which sees it - one. Read my earlier comment. Awareness is all there is just like the screen. Refer to the metaphor above.

Edited May 27, 2020 by Jacobsrw

[Member]

13 minutes ago, Jacobsrw said:

@Member You misunderstand. Awareness imparts all that is perceived. As such, awareness is both what is seen and the seer which sees it - one. Read my earlier comment. Awareness is all there is just like the screen. Refer to the metaphor above.

Not sure if I got it right but it sounds like you said there is a screen and a movie and "you" are just one of the movies...

To be one thing limits it from being another so to be pure infinitude the screen must impart all possibilities without preference to either one.

[Jacobsrw]

@Member Exactly! But don’t merely believe this, go to your experience and see if it is true. Seriously. It’s powerful to do this. It will radically recontextualise how you interpret.

[Member]

Just now, Jacobsrw said:

@Member Exactly! But don’t merely believe this, go to your experience and see if it is true. Seriously. It’s powerful to do this. It will radically recontextualise how you interpret.

You are the screen.