Mellowmarsh

Except as distinction?

If like you mentioned earlier there is no effort to be, then there’s no effort involved for being to project its own movie that is obviously sourced from within its own being.

I really vibe with this point. I really would love to live in a world where human beings could just be, hug,cry,laugh,dance, eat, and love together without murmuring a single word to each other. However, that’s obviously not how the human experience plays out, is it.

There’s also no such thing as no state.

Yes but, you cannot separate the story from the book, can you? The no story is still part of the story.

There’s no effort required to be the you that you already are, I agree. But isn’t it also true that there’s no effort watching the movie of I - I am projecting on the screen of awareness. In the same context there is no effort involved while watching a movie at the cinema. 🍿

Then there can’t be such a state as an “absent mind” because there would be no mind there to acknowledge the absence.

It’s okay to watch the actors playing their parts in the movie, knowing full well those actors are inseparable from the dreamer dreaming them. There’s no watcher without something to watch. The something is the only place the watcher can exist. When there’s no thing showing on the screen, the watcher is also absent, because both the watcher and the watched are inseparably one. In essence, nothing is happening.

So, Nothing knows that. Eh? Isn’t that statement still a form of knowing? As you’ve already pointed out…”The moment you speak, you are already dividing the indivisible” Indivisible implies division. This division is humanly unavoidably created. You never speak of silence by filling it up with words. That’s why animals are truly authentic enlightened beings, unlike human beings who identify and attach to their imagined conceptual language.

Nicely put! 👌

Is it claiming though, or is it just simple understanding. Understanding is the clarity sought, is it not?

Ultimately, understanding causality is the peace that passes all understanding. I love this ➡️ ( Osho on awareness and ecstasy. ) ( Osho suggests that awareness can initially feel like a disturbance, but ultimately leads to a deeper experience of ecstasy. ) How true is that? That’s been my personal experience anyway. 😎

By far, the most valuable and the most useful post/ message I’ve ever read on this forum. 👍🙏 Kudos to you. Loved it.

👌 Nice one. All the one love ❤️ action, dreaming difference where there isn’t any, except in this conception, imagined.

Dreamt experiences are appearing as finite POV’s infinitely for eternity as and through many dreamers. There’s no division between the dreamer and the dream. The dreamer’s only existence is in the dream, that takes on the shape of a finite character infinitely appearing in finite form. So even the many dreamers are illusory finite characters, appearing as though they are real. The dreamer can only know itself upon an awakening from its own dream where recognition and remembrance is triggered that dreaming had been experienced, albeit illusory hallucinations of auditory sound and light.

That would be like asking the rain to stop, or the rainbow to stop appearing. Many authors appear, but there’s only one reader reading writing no one ever writ.

To know there is no other is to simultaneously know other. However, to know you know, some thing must be known, simultaneously creating the duality of knower and known. And yet, known things, know nothing.

One who understands the truth of not-self is no longer entangled in the idea of ‘I’ and ‘mine’. Absolute Solipsism - Leo’s solipsism video is an accurate pointing. Not nonsense.

❤️

You cannot even claim an absolute position on any opinion, because absolute implies relative which like you said is a dual perspective. So even relative ideas about the absolute is absurdism.

@James123 👍 Nice.

I think that once our own personal opinions about understanding the nature of self is fully recognised and understood, then they usually cannot be changed by another, once their mind is made up so to speak. Ultimately it’s the individual that changes it’s own mind, and not another person changing it. I personally have no interest in convincing anyone else about what I understand, and that it is what they should understand too. I never would dream of saying to someone else that their personal understanding shouldn’t be like that. That’s just arrogance. What I do believe is that we’re each and everyone of us capable of arriving at the pure understanding of what self-actualisation is. I also believe that no one has to be convinced by another, nor try to be the convincer to another. As the truth is in all of us, whether we choose to know it or not, it doesn’t actually matter or change the truth.. I can’t be bothered listening to people who tell others they are on the wrong track, or that they ought not to listen to so and so, or that they are still suffering, as if they could possibly know the true mind of what another is able to understand.