UnbornTao

No, it is intellectual on my part, hence the use of "we" on my post above.

The mind is a terrible thing in how it can be used. See how one can completely make up worlds to inhabit.

My take is that he's saying that suffering itself is an activity you generate--it's like a mirage--and so it can be not done. He may be pointing to the central role we play in our experience of suffering. Currently we think we just encounter suffering somewhere out there, and that our only option is to endure it, manage it, ignore it.

A student, filled with emotion and crying, implored, “Why is there so much suffering?” The Zen Roshi replied, “No reason.” —Shunryu Suzuki

Does it? Might largely be a function of how one sees the world. Aren't there things being born and flowering all the time, too? Negative bias seems to have an evolutionary root--what needs to be managed takes precedence over what is present, as the latter quickly gets taken for granted. But we don't have to be stuck with it.

But what is it? What do we take the ego to be? What's our experience of it? Is it part of self? What is self?

Sounds good. Do you mean that ego is in your felt experience, though? To be clear, I do consider the truth as graspable. Faith can be useful for certain things but it might not have anything to do with finding out what's true. Do you mean faith that getting your nature is possible?

Jesus Christ, read 10 books in a day or something

Other animals seem to be doing fine without ego, so what is it? Trying to challenge the assumption that there is something to be found that is our real selves. Perhaps there is--after all, we exist-- however, by nature it must be different from what we think it is.

A book of Rumi's poetry. Last few years, probably one of the M1 Apple laptops.

I'd say beyond intellectually concluding something, we have yet to experience what this real and false self is all about. Seems to me ego is an aspect of self, although it depends on how each thing is held by you. Anyway, we take ourselves to be something-maybe that itself, our whole sense of self, is not true--but for us it certainly appears to be that way--what's more real to us than our selves? Regarding the true self, that's up for grabs, really. It might not even be a self to begin with. Something to consider.

RIP Water.

Massive burrito-delivering machines, I knew it.

No vanilla, no problem

Are there any 100% stainless steel? Many contain aluminum, too.

What do you mean by internalize? Go after principles instead. Ironically, when it comes to performing, just focusing on the result is a misstep--you need to pay attention to what precedes the result of any given process and catch yourself whenever a step wasn't appropriately done or wasn't done as well, as demanded by your goal. It's like wanting your own grown tree right now without having done the requisite prior work. Watering the land, for example, comes after planting the seeds. At some point then, with the right conditions, and by being aware of the whole process throughout, you'll have a tree of your own. Focusing on what precedes the end result is key.

You know, now that you say that, I refuse to die. "Catch me if you can!" This could make for a nice taoist poem.

@Husseinisdoingfine Watch the use of capslock.

You start by allowing yourself to be bored and tedious instead of unconsciously resisting it, which is often what occurs. Why do we generally seem to dislike boredom and the mundane? Call it Enlightened Boredom.

Would like to make this at some point:

Let's concede that certain observations might be "factual", just maybe. Given that, what's threatened by certain posts may precisely be "selfishness", as something within you gets confronted by an occurrence that is by nature independent of your self-agenda.

Wishful thinking aside, we might not comprehend what life is. What is life for real? Better to question that.

Since you bring up life, in the end you'll die.

Marketing