SoonHei

yes. seeking freedom without desire of states itself would indeed be sub-seeking just like for example, the do nothing technique of meditation. if you "try" to do nothing, you are infact "doing" something... i dont think @Jack River is seeking . that's just how he's describing it to us and as you know, language isn't always the best tool just pay attention to his pointers instead @Misagh

LOLOL <3 bless. this right here is the end of seeking. end of expecting/desiring nice! also. as u said more progress in the last month vs the last 8 years just goes to show, it really is that simple one may save the time, as leo says, and many other enlightened beings say.. by focusing on really what's being asked to do (or not-do) good for you.

@Jack River hmmm i can definitely see the self/ego calling the shots. calling all the shots actually i think adyashanti also speaks about this movement. unsure if faceless/robdl have had reviewed and learned from his work or also arrived at this point with their own investigation anyhow. it's another way of looking at the end of the seeking. the end of seeking = understanding the self-feeding loop the end occurs because the illusion is seen for what it is am i on the right track-ish there?

@Jack River have seen your recent posts. love them which place are you speaking from now? are you now watchful/mindful of the fear-movement in everything you do and thereby are able to easily disassociate with it? has your seeking ended and you are now slowly intergrating? or just have had a deeper insight recently with the work of @robdl and faceless ? also. be sure that you aren't clinging to a trap on the path. thanks

just had a thought while watching one video what exactly is the goal there? for the person asking the question, she said that she had already had a few awakenings/glimpses etc yet mooji is asking her questions like, who watches the vibration that you say you feel? or like even that emotion you feel is watched... or the mind is watched etc is the goal of that person attending satsang to try and get an awakening again in that moment? or is the goal to end the seeking? like the person has already had the glimpse/awakening.. so she knows what her true nature is (maybe one forgets, or as the Ego comes back post awakening..) anyhow, just wanna know what's the purpose of the one asking questions usually, especially since they have already had their awakening... i guess the same goes with mooji's own sitting with papaji, when he's in attendance and asking him question, i am sure he had had his own awakenings prior to that... so he was seeking the end of the search? maybe that isnt the case for all...

@K VIL @Sashaj waaa?

muhfukkin Leo <3

@K VIL awaiting answer

it cannot be the I because in that state, the I is "seen" to be an idea which is dissolved at that point whatever it is, which remains, during awakening (i guess the "impersonal awareness" ), whatever the "experience" which is occurring during awakening is also then watched. whatever the insights which come about during awakening are also watched/known/observed since the " I " is dead / gone / non-existent during awakening... then whatever, which remains after the death of " I ", that watches (is aware of) the awakening, is THAT not itself watched by a higher self? so the personal ego I is replaced by something else which is associated with... but that in turn is watched also... is a further awakening or going-meta to this state required to be present from the place where watching is taking place but not in turn being watched by anything?

agreed but i mean the purpose of the questions which the guru is asking the seeker... what is the guru hoping for the seeker to find out? - that she/he is not the body? (many already know and have experienced this) - or to have another awakening? - or to have a deeper understanding and see thru and somehow end their seeking?

wow about this. i have told myself this that i think i feel asleep (during meditations) but it did not feel like the deep-sleep type of sleep. it was different in a very subtle but noticeable way unsure if i got that level. for my, i may actually have been asleep lol (i am a beginner in this process thats why) but when i read what you wrote here. it clicked for me that i may have had this too. gonna try and again "notice" more deeply this time

@Preetom the full description of that book metaphor also incorporated the AUTHOR an author of the book knows the entire story, past, present, future etc GOD is the AUTHOR of reality... knowing the "past" present/NOW and "future" the readers of this infinte book of reality is the role each of us is playing right now... each of us being our ego-selfs which experience time but yeah, i liked this anoalogy of how and why God/Absolute does not know time - just knows all but reality is a lot more layers than this i am afraid. as the reader is the author is the book is the content is all of it oh yes! and it was done so. beautifully also. i like tom campbell's way of explaining it using a video game too wherein he says think of each of us as the character in a video game, say world of warcraft. the character in the video game cannot ever turn around and look outside of the monitor/screen and see the human player . just like that the consiouness which is the driving force in each of us does not exist in this world which we are in, but is the video game player which exists meta-to our world and once again, reality is a lot more than that cuz meta and our world are all blended in and are one

@Toby so whatever the view, it is all ultimately one... and wow, the consciousness and awareness distinction as you put it is nice. first time i have seen it described as such (might have missed it before in videos i have seen) so with this: "What is self" (self = consciousness, no-self = awareness) can the "path" or the steps "taken" be shown as: death of ego / I thought >>> transcending consciousness >>> "arriving" at awareness highest/ultimate place of being, which is often described as unknowable, is then the awareness ? (per the path shown above) ^^

this here shows me you deeply understand whatever it is you're describing here i am also understanding what you're talking about .. i like thinking the entire book being the whole and the single page one reads as the current experience occurring.

@cetus56 with what you have posted, this is how i feel it answers my above-quoted querry... THAT is not watched by a higher self... but THAT is watched by itself - self-aware pure consciousness is what remains when the "ego/I" is dissolved

lol @Feel Good dunno... i was just talking about the fact that THE MIND cannot understand it. as Leo/all else say. because mind is finite . and absolute is infinite

@Nahm The ego/I . this is what is being referred in the post also - isn't what I really am deep down, the absolute, the being-level me the me which is the only me in existence - can't that refer to itself as " I " ? i guess the issue with this question here might be that at the highest level of being / the absolute level / the absolute does not talk about or refer to itself it just exists, simply is. not doing anything. anywho, please guide more on the original question... thanks

there's only so much intellectual/conceptual understanding one can have the real fact is that the mind CANNOT grasp or understand this fully. you have to still the mind and what remains is what recognizes and understands this all

@The Don see also

what you believe will become your reality but if you believe with the intent of it working, it wont it has to be deep and authentic and without a doubt just like you know if u jump infront of a truck going at 100mph, u gone be roadkill. that level of belief.

Unsure if my ego has fallen to Leo... But i don't think this is a trap lol Often I come on the forum , go to Leo's profile n view his last recent posts Reading those alone, whatever they maybe in response to, make it worthwhile coming online. Keep it going Leo!

I guess it just points to that deepest realm which even witnesses the one that is aware or simply , it witnesses even awareness It just is. Blank . Point. Zero. Just . Is. And from it, all else rises, including first of, the awareness

@Martin123 osho used to mash hard no?

LOL

Watched Leo's life's a dream video Have a question. So it seems that while we are dreaming, that dream in itself is as real as our normal waking state. But is our waking state not in a way a different kind of reality as we keep returning to it...? Or that's how the experience seems to flow... But we keep returning to our "same" waking state reality and dream a random dream every night. Also, when one has a lucid dream, is that comparable to awakening in the real world? From that dream reality perspective, the one lucid dream moment ( I was 10ish) I had, I still remember it because it became as "real" or high definition as our waking reality when I became lucid in it. Anyhow, I recall upon discovering in the dream that HOLY SHIT, THIS IS A DREAM it was pretty 'liberating" . Not that I was having a bad dream but all of a sudden I did a bunch of shit any thing I thought of would happen.. only lasted like 6-8 seconds maybe lol and then I woke up The realization that I am dreaming was quite WTF moment and cool but I still had a sense of I. I chose to fly ... I didn't see flight happen or oneness... So I guess awakening in our waking dream reality must be much more crazy as the sense of I would be also seen to have been an illusion.