Mellowmarsh

I remember being dead. It was the most uneventful period of my life. Nothing to write home about, nothing to report.

What solipsism gets right is that there is only one thing, what it gets wrong is that that thing is “you”. One thing chooses nothing and imposes no perspective. If there’s a “ you” who knows solipsism is true, then “you” would never know it’s false.

Oh Leo Lol, you’re so incorrigible. 😂 Look at this bad boy 🔽 🍕 pizzas 🍕 people incarnated as P zzzzzz’s

You are posting to a shadow. The shadow you are casting and catching in your net.

The knower is equal to the known. There’s no difference between a high vibrational Buddha and a low vibrational Buddha.

True "letting go" isn't a forceful act of giving up, but a natural consequence of deep, non-dualistic seeing (insight) into the true, empty, interconnected nature of reality, revealing the "self" as an illusion, thus dissolving attachment and allowing effortless release, unlike forced detachment which remains a form of clinging.

I’m not sure how you are personally putting that into context. But for me here, there is only the Absolute.

If some thing is yours, it’s not you. You don’t have a mind, you are the mind. You are awareness aware it’s aware, but not as a conceptual object, except in this conception, as a mentally constructed concept. It’s even a mentality constructed paradox, this mind being the many of the one, namely zero point energy. AI (“A state of pure, undifferentiated potential, the fundamental, infinite field connecting all things (like ancient concepts of prana or chi), accessible through deep presence, "no-mind" (mushin), or heart-centered awareness, allowing access to universal consciousness, healing, and creation beyond ego and limitations.”)

Listen to what I said. No word can define what is, or, every word defines it. That’s my answer. If you don’t like it, I have no problem with that. Then all that’s left is to find your own answer, probably from the same place I got my answer. Or, you can always find your own place. But I’m fairly sure that we both are in the same place, namely here.

Something had to be fundamental, which had to exist always. The only thing known is a conscious of being conscious. Things are known to this consciousness, but the things known, know nothing of their existence, because the conscious knowing is equal to the known, there’s literally no separation there between the knower and the known. So in essence, known “things” can never be conscious, because only consciousness in which known things arise and fall are inseparable from the consciousness that knows them. So even a robot built of physical material objects is just consciousness aware of material physical objects in consciousness. It’s never going to be material physical objects are aware of consciousness. There’s a very subtle difference, but it’s the same one consciousness the always existing fundamental substrate dreaming difference where there is none. Ultimately, there’s nothing inside or outside of consciousness, it’s one singular consciousness, there’s no other consciousness.

No word can define what is, or, every word defines it.

Can a closed fist receive a gift?

Consciousness can only be conscious of consciousness. Consciousness cannot know it is conscious without splitting itself in half as a subject and object duality. This duality is still only consciousness conscious of consciousness. Therefore , a machine can never be aware, or know its creator, because consciousness and the content of consciousness is always one indivisible consciousness. There’s literally nothing inside or outside of consciousness. Strange, but true.

For me personally, it’s not necessarily a phase, or a fad so to speak, it’s more to do with the recognition of being “in phase” with life, and surrendering to it without making any grunting and grinding noises. To be in perfect rhythm harmony and sync with life so to speak. Just be without trying or practice, just effortless living, not forced or fake, just raw and real. I don’t practice or try being an expression of life, I’m just freedom being freedom. Crying still arises, laughter still arises, rage and anger still arises, calm and collected still arises, love, hate and jealousy still arises. However, I have zero attachment to these feelings or emotions anymore, I accept they’re part of the game of human life expression. I’m no longer phased with being human. I don’t actually care one iota if I live or die, because I have come to realise I am being lived by something much greater than myself and I trust 💯 in that incredible process without any reservations or resistance or doubt. I understand that I live on the very razors edge of creation, and that I’m just a minuscule localised dot of light within the entire cosmos having a finite existence. And that I could potentially be here today and gone tomorrow. I’ve no more knowledge than that, that’s the limit to my knowledge at this juncture.

@James123 Lovely!

It’s that beautiful, it’s terrifying.

Nice. In essence, we fear the loss of our current, tangible self, not the state of being before that self was formed. And yet a self can apparently appear out of that state of being before that self was formed? From formless to form to formless ? We fear what is ultimately not actually there in reality? And don’t see the what is always there, here?

Had to revisit this thread because it’s too good. I just wanted to share this little beauty I found on the inner net. ‘I am’ is a conceiving; ‘I am this’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall not be’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be possessed of form’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be formless’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be percipient’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be non-percipient’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be neither-percipient-nor-non-percipient’ is a conceiving. Conceiving is a disease, conceiving is a tumour, conceiving is a dart. By overcoming all conceivings, one is called a sage at peace. And the sage at peace is not born, does not age, does not die; he is not shaken and is not agitated. For there is nothing present in him by which he might be born. Not being born, how could he age? Not ageing, how could he die? Not dying, how could he be shaken? Not being shaken, why should he be agitated?

Thanks, the idea of surrender occurs all the time for me personally. I can’t speak for others. For me personally, I’ve undergone the painstaking process of deconstructing the mental constructs of concepts. I’m no longer seduced by the “blinding spell” of concepts, rather I see through their empty nature. I’ve realised the images on the screen of consciousness are equal to the projected of this projection. For me it’s all Light, or Emptiness looking at itself through it’s own mirror effect. Reified through the process of conceptual construction, deconstructed. Hopefully this doesn’t sound too salady.

Ultimately there is not-even a letting go or let be, as there is already continuous dissolving and arising and this ever dissolving and arising turns out to be self-liberating. Without this ‘self’ or ‘Self’, there is no ‘doing’, there is only spontaneous arising. The ego is the illusory sense of a self where there isn’t one except as belief in the mind.

You can't decide to let go of the ego; you see through the ego's illusion, and then letting go simply happens as a natural function of that clear seeing, leading to profound inner peace and freedom.

@KoryKat Great post.