Mellowmarsh

Yes thanks for that, I agree with you, and yes, I’ve already done the surrendering so I know what you mean, in fact I understand everything you ever talk about on this forum. 🙂

It’s also funny how being never gets to choose being or nonbeing.

Thanks Nemra, I’ve heard about how psychedelic usage is a beneficial experience for those seeking to transcend the illusory sense of separation. But I’m not into it, never have been, never will be. I could be missing out on something amazing but I’d rather stay grounded, I have a fear of heights, lol, just kidding. 😊 Thanks for engaging in this kind of discourse.

I exist but I don’t know how I exist or why or what I am. Imagination fills in the not knowing. Imagination is like watercolour paint upon a flowing river.

In my experience it’s just not possible to touch that still state of thought free awareness without causing a ripple to form on contact. It’s like trying to jump ahead and beyond your own shadow. Anyway, that’s just the way I personally feel about it, because one still has to deal with external distraction which predominantly dominates one’s existence. Yes, the still screen of awareness is ultimately what we are, but we’re also the movie inseparable from the screen. I personally experience the movie more than the screen. That’s just the way it makes sense to me.

Who knows? Question the answer. And does an answer even need to be questioned, else all there is are questions with no answers.

What I mean is things are not known even as they exist unknowingly. For example: A tree exists, it can be observed to exist. The tree is functioning as a living organism that exists without doubt, but the tree itself doesn’t know it exists. That’s what I mean by not being there in a self knowing sense. The tree doesn’t know it exists even though it’s observed to exist because there’s some thing that is aware of the tree. So my question is if a tree is unaware of it’s existence, then what is aware of the tree? Im sorry if this line of thinking is just a rambling mess, apologies in advance. But I genuinely like to be able to understand how other people interpret their reality, it has always fascinated me how differently each of us seek to understand ourselves and the reality that we’ve been born into. I just feel like this is the first time I’ve been alive, and here I am trying to figure out how the heck I got to be alive just to die. I really don’t know what’s going on, except to imagine everything, and even that is unknowable to me, it’s just a word with meaning attached, but ultimately means nothing if I’m just going to die anyway.

There’s awareness of being aware which feels like aliveness. But there’s no awareness or feeling of being dead, or of being unalive. Is that what makes awareness immortal, in that it cannot be aware of having had a beginning or an end? “ It “ being awareness.

Okay thanks for making that clear. I understand that the awareness of thought is the same awareness that is aware of things. Buddhism states that thoughts are things. And that there’s no thing actually there independent of the thought thing. So even the identifier of thought is also a thought thing.

Yes I understand that. But the experience always has to be about the experiencer which must be present for experience to be known. But to talk about a thoughtless experience doesn’t make sense to me because there would be nobody there in the thoughtless experience to tell itself it’s having the thought free experience. But if it makes sense to you, then I’ve no problem with your view, it’s just something I’m not feeling.

Enlightenment is a myth. It’s an idea that has zero information of knowing what an idea is.

So it seems thoughts arise from a thoughtless state. Is what I interpret from your answer. There’s the experience of thoughts arising from a thoughtless state. But I’m not sure the thoughtless state is an actual experience, because there wouldn’t be anyone there in a thoughtless state to tell itself “I am not thinking”

What happens to immortal awareness when the body that is known to immortal awareness dies? And is immortal awareness only experienced when the body is alive? Does immortal awareness require a body to know it is immortal? A body that not only appears to be alive to awareness but can also appear to be unalive as when the body dies, even though the body still remains after its death, the awareness has disappeared. My question is, where has the immortal awareness gone while the dead body still remains?

What experiences immortality without limits?

I mean that the thing that identifies must be the same for anything that is being identified with. I just wanted to come back to the above point for more clarity. When you say the thing that identifies must be the same thing as the thing identified. Can you identify what that thing is exactly, and is this identified “thing” conscious? It’s just that I’m not really sure what you’re showing me here. Thanks.

So does that mean there’s an apparent demand to make what is past and dead to appear as the direct immediacy of the present moment?

Okay. 👍

I am the knowing that cannot be known.

I don’t know. I is known, but not by I

No, thing knows this.

So you existed as an unconsciousness you, until you had the ability to be conscious you?

Identify what is the same as the thought?

This conception is directly known yes in the instance knowing arises, one with the knowing.

Why wasn’t the I known in it’s beginning, in it’s conception?

Describe the thing that’s the same as the thought it identifies with?