Faceless

What subconscious? Confirming to a view is an example of the supposed freedom in will-choice. Truth is not fixed, therefore it’s doesn't belong to “me”-“you”.

@egoless what’s non-duality? what practices?

Figured you would No way as way... ??

Seeking psychological security in getting a buzz, and seeking psychological security in “spirituality”, really being one and the same movement of the self seeking security in thought(pleasure).

?Indeed... an example of “the i” clinging to its own movement/content.

Perhaps not. The Responsibility is on “us” “we “ (consciousnesses) ??

To tell someone they are THE SELF and not share about the trickery of mind...you do not see the danger in that? And again, this is not directed at “you”, but “us”..(consciousness).

Facing what-is all the way through is essential.

“I” am a newbie

I don’t, no. To me that is going beyond where one has yet begun. To start off out of the gate in the illusion of psychological time.

To point to the trickery of the mind is essential. Then there is no need to communicate that which is inevitably going to become an idea for another. You see the point here?

Can that which is not silent explore silence?

Perhaps start closer to home. Discuss consciousness as it is in the case of self. Start with fear, pleasure, how thought moves in relation to psychological becoming and so on. Talk with, not at. As if you both do not know. Two self’s exploring the self/thought, consciousness as it can be directly seen now.

In this case trust implies psychological dependence. Dependence, a path, perhaps the greatest hinderance to freedom. Such a person would not be dependent on you, or a path. An actual blank mind is not dependent on anything within the realm of time(thought). Hello by the way @Shin??

Can we watch our own divisive attack patterns in which we have rationalized-justified our own mechanical behavior? Do we see the subtletie of fear seeking security in playing the opposition game? Are we aware of the fact of seeking psychological security when we criticize another? And isn’t that another form of illusion? Are we aware of the many subtle ways we derive pleasure in antagonism, which is another form of violence?

We tend to adopt this as an idea, and our action continues to speak otherwise. The self is very subtle and will play such tricks.

Usually people who are readers of traditional text don’t understand me. Usually people who directly look at themselves understand what I say. But there are exceptions of course. Do you understand my intent in my original post to you? By the way not directed towards “you” but other me’s Simply to show how freedom is essential to see WHAT IS, WHAT-IS never comes about without that very necessary freedom.

Has this been seen..⬇️ While already free, or is this seeing the result of longing for freedom?

Who sees this? The chooser? The question is...Has “the chooser” conformed to this piece of knowledge? And is not this piece of knowledge and the chooser really one and the same movement of self/thought(time)?

Can we see that action in accordance to this will-choice(the chooser), which is ultimately FEAR resisting its own fact, is simply evasion of WHAT-IS?

Is will free? Is “the i” and this will one and the same movement of fear/psychological becoming? Is choice freedom? Freedom to choose may seem nice, but can we look deeper? It’s much more subtle than we tend to see. Or is it this will-choice(as the chooser), why love is not? If one goes deep enough down to the subtleties one may find that FEAR underlies this choosing-will.

No...I saw the futility in evading the fact of fear, as it became quite apparent that doing so nourishes that fear. This illusion that I will become secure in time was seen through. Then it was not feed any longer. I communed with suffering without escape. That simple. If I would have been the type to seek guidance from an authority I would perhaps still be caught in my own illusion. Needing motivation, guidance, to me contribute to that very suffering.

Is TRUTH FIXED? Is truth some”thing” to be experienced?

Indeed.. The action taken in accordance to the notion that there is actually a division between the experiencer and that which it experiences. Seeking psychological security(seeking to make permanent that which is fundamentally impermanent), brings about psychological insecurity, and nourishes the illusion of i, and therefore perpetuates further enslavement. Thought sees the necessity of order, yet every action it takes nourishes disorder.

I’m not referring to sadhhuru specifically. I’m speaking generally