Faceless

Member
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    4,948

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Faceless

  2. Posted · Edited by Faceless

    5 minutes ago, robdl said:

    The images one projects about others always shows what self-image is being nourished/reinforced, as the ego/self-image projects images out of its own movement that validates-sustains the very same movement.   This is how we learn through relationship.

    Well said...

    It is quite easy to detect this movement of image projection. Indeed, some will read this thread and see first hand fragmentation in movement. As this too is an opportunity to learning in relationship. 

    As the tittle states...PHENOMENON :)

     

  3. Posted · Edited by Faceless

     

     

    27 minutes ago, robdl said:

    If you tell someone to be "passively aware", they may unwittingly and subtly do so through the lens-fragment of effort-motive-intent.  Ego sneakily will use "passive awareness" for ego's purposes. 

     

    Indeed so..

    Fear will conform to the idea of passivity to sustain its own continuity. This subtle movement to sustain-maintain psychological permanence will chase the abstraction of “passivity”. This is effort-motive-intent, psychological time in movement. Thought has then simply deceived itself into identifying with its idea of passivity. 

    The question is, are we aware of this divisive movement influenced by psychological becoming in all its subtle forms? 

    After all, that is the intention of this thread. 

  5. Posted

    22 minutes ago, molosku said:

    Btw, how do you feel about the cult-leaderish status you are slowly but steadily achieving here, as a few posters praise you, reference to you and claim they are your diciples even? 

    That’s a great question, I see it as important to get across as well. I posted yesterday about it...

     

    To depend psychologically on an authority is the same as the self seeking security in its own movement of thought, (experience, knowledge, memory). This is the root of psychological insecurity. 

    This is to nourish the false division between the knower and that which is knows.

     

    To contribute to the disorder of thought and its mechanical reaction to fragment itself off from that which it seeks security in. 

    To preserve the illusion of “the self”, the “psychological entity”, as being independent from the contents of thought itself. 

    To shelter-harbor unconsciously, a spot for (fear-self), to conceal and preserve its own movement of self deception. 

    To promote the activity of self sabotage, disguised as an aiding remedy. 

    To advocate such irresponsibility is to assist in the continuation of the conditioned consciousness. 

     

    There is nothing wrong with listening-learning from one another, that is essential, but to depend psychologically on one another only strengthens the disharmony in relationship with ourselves, and one another as a result of that. 

    Everything I write can be observed by the reader as a fact that takes place in oneself, depending on if they are capable of listening-seeing the truth in that fact. 

    If the reader doesn’t see what I write as fact, and instead sees it as concepts, theory, or abstraction, in which then that reader conforms too, then we have ourselves an ego seeking psychological security in an authority. 

    The same as the self seeking security in its own movement of thought. 

     

     

  6. Posted · Edited by Faceless

    @molosku lol yeah these last few posts kinda ran off course, but the stuff about fragmentation can be directly observed in yourself. It’s all right here in ones experience. As is expressed in the threads tittle; The phenomenon of fragmentation. 

    It can literally all be observed directly. But the conditioned eye prevents that observation. 

    Any way, I appreciate your honesty and post as well. ??

  7. Posted · Edited by Faceless

    38 minutes ago, molosku said:

    All this seems like speculation/theorizing with no real application to ones awakening. This makes things seem way more complicated than they are, and I feel it enforces the compulsion to "get" something about enlightenment.

    Maybe it is just the writing style that is covering a very simple truth, I dont know. I find the most profound is thing is very often the most simplest thing, that is not overlooked anymore. 

    It may seem like that but the mind is very complex...It’s not content-information to be accumulated. We are not building scaffolding, (a series of conceptualizations in which one seeks security in). 

    It’s in seeing-understanding the whole of thought there can be an holistic-choiceless awareness in which doesn’t perpetuate the self feeding loop of fragmentation. So there can be an awareness to positive-negative movement of the self, in which incomplete action or divisive action is not nourished. This is about embodiment. To embody holy action. Not be influenced by conflict, confusion, and contradiction that is the result of this fragmented action nourished by dualistic movement of the self-thought. 

    To aid in the cessation of psychological registration, recollection, and its projection. Essential when it comes to relationship with onenself and others. Also the only way in which there can be healdessness or an awareness in which is timeless everyday, all day, if one has that leisure of course. It’s Not a temporary communion with the absolute, but an ongoing relationship with it THE HAPPENING. 

    Or otherwise known as the ending of experience, or the ending of time. 

    In the ending of experience is the beginning of that which is sacred, THE IMMEASURABLE. 

     

  11. Posted

    2 minutes ago, who chit said:

    What is, doesn't have to identify as being what is. What is,already is,without having to become.

    :)Indeed... 

    But the self is very illusive. It will try and pull one over on itself ?...it is one of the subtle ways even the most “advanced” lol..get sucked in to illusion-self deception. 

    5 minutes ago, who chit said:

    Thought-self cannot be what is,because it has to make a movement to try to be what is.

    Indeed again...

    thought-self implies identification, which clings to familiarity, (what has been and projects in accordance to that), and what-is implies constant change, being dynamic. The self it’s accumulation can never actually meet what is without distortion. You are right, thought-self/fear always moves away from what-is. 

     

    9 minutes ago, who chit said:

    What is,is prior to thought/self/time/memory experience.In holistic observation, what is,see's this movement (holistic observation) of thought self trying to "become" (to experience), and in that seeing,the accumulated conditioning of thought/self/time/memory/experience dissolves.

    I think we are in communion on this, friend. :)

     

    10 minutes ago, who chit said:

    What is,is pure / free,of any/all accumulated psychological conditioning of "i"thought/mind/memory/experience. Pure being in and of itself,free of psychological accumulation.
    Pureness of Being,is what is. There is no becoming.

     

    Then perhaps ones head may go missing ??

  14. Posted · Edited by Faceless

    1 hour ago, who chit said:

    Realize that what is "you, is not the accumulated thoughts,ideas,concepts/beliefs,likes/dislikes,experiences (i.e.,memory/time) of the mind and/or body.

    To be free, is to be free of the accumulation of the "I"thought/mind/memory/time/experience(all one). Then the unitary psychological movement of "i-me -self-/"thought/"fear" as one whole movement, will cease.

    Would you say that it is also very important to understand that the self will also subtly dis-identify itself with that accumulated content/movement of thought/self-experience, and identify with something “greater”? 

    The self will also seek security in thought/identification with god. 

    Would you agree that will further nourish the self feeding loop of time-fear/division?

  17. Posted · Edited by Faceless

    Looking to understand fragmentation through the fragmented lens of thought can be very complicated and confusing.

    The problem is there will be divided attention, (discerning-analyzing), fragmentation as if it were something separate from that fragmentary process itself. 

    One will then be looking at fragmentation as an idea or a concept; the self trying to understand fragmentation as if it were independent of that phenomenon. 

    Looking to understand this phenomenon as an abstraction won’t suffice. It is a fact that can be observed within the structure of thought-experience, but thought-experience will distort the actual seeing of that fact. 

    To be identified with thought is also to be in resistance to what-is. This resistance is the attachment to this process of discernment-analysis, (pre-assumptions-bias/prejudice), in which has been accumulated over time. 

    To see the truth in this fact, the psychological accumulation of “the self”, as in experience, knowledge, and memory, cannot be acting as a barrier in that seeing-understanding, (observation). 

    It will be very difficult indeed to understand-observe this process of fragmentation, which is a conditioned response, with that same limited and conditioned observation. 

    As long as this understanding is looked at as a concept-theory, the insight-understanding will only be partial and incomplete. 

    Unconditioned observation is the only way to have a holistic insight into the whole of this phenomenon of fragmentation-thought/self division. It’s only in holistic observation that there is complete action, in which doesn’t further feed that self feeding loop of fragmentation. 

     

     

     

     

     

  18. Posted · Edited by Faceless

    1 hour ago, robdl said:

    The fear-antagonism faceless speaks of could also be referring to when someone has their spiritual authority attacked/exposed, and the fear-defense-antagonism that can breed.  Disciples attacking the guru's critics,  the movement of fear rationalizing-dismissing the behaviour, etc. 

    Basically the dependency on that authority and self-identification with that authority perpetuates fear that defends the authority, defends-sustains the identity with it.

    Well said, and precisely what was implied...

     

    To depend psychologically on an authority is the same as the self seeking security in its own movement of thought, (experience, knowledge, memory). This is the root of psychological insecurity. 

    This is to nourish the false division between the knower and that which is knows.

     

    To contribute to the disorder of thought and its mechanical reaction to fragment itself off from that which it seeks security in. 

    To preserve the illusion of “the self”, the “psychological entity”, as being independent from the contents of thought itself. 

    To shelter-harbor unconsciously, a spot for (fear-self), to conceal and preserve its own movement of self deception. 

    To promote the activity of self sabotage, disguised as an aiding remedy. 

    To advocate such irresponsibility is to assist in the continuation of the conditioned consciousness. 

     

     There is nothing wrong with listening-learning from one another, that is essential, but to depend psychologically on one another only strengthens the disharmony in relationship with ourselves, and one another as a result of that. 

    Everything I write can be observed by the reader as a fact that takes place in oneself, depending on if they are capable of listening-seeing the truth in that fact. 

    If the reader doesn’t see what I write as fact, and instead sees it as concepts, theory, or abstraction, in which then that reader conforms too, then we have ourselves an ego seeking psychological security in an authority.

    The same as the self seeking security in its own movement of thought.

     

     

     

  21. Posted · Edited by Faceless

    1 hour ago, robdl said:

    If you sit down to meditate and the mind immediately goes to think about food or tv, or something you did earlier that day, as an escape from the stillness/boredom/present moment, THAT escaping action of thought is fear-aversion-resistance in operation.

    This processs of Identification feeds off its own familiarity.

     

    Stillness, emptiness, or the silence of what-is is a direct threat to the continuity of this process of identification. Identification depends “things” to identify with.

     

    As has been said before, identification is frightened by change. The self is always in movement to capture and maintain a sense of permanence. The dynamic nature of NOW is always changing, which reveals the self the fact of its own actual impermanence. 

     

    Identification implies attachment and clinging to its own content which is inevitably static in nature.

     

    To cling to the static content of thought is to sustain the illusion of security-permanence, which in fact only perpetuates insecurity-impermanence. 

     

    Without “things” or (thought), which is static, and (familiar), the self feels threatened. The self seeks security by projecting its own pre-conceptions (what is known), or (bias-prejudice), to meet the fact of insecurity that the dynamic nature of the present moment or THE NOW presents. 

  22. Posted · Edited by Faceless

    27 minutes ago, robdl said:

    Desire seeks, and fear escapes, but seeking and escaping are one and the same movement of thought; thought self-perpetuating by invoking the past/imagined future.

    Indeed..nice post!!:)

    Desire-self in pursuit of satisfaction, self affirmation, self validation, and so on, all being evasion from the fact to the invented abstraction, (idea). 

    To move away from what-is, is to seek psychological security in thought, (what should be) or (the abstraction invented in accordance to its content accumulated from the past).

    Both the content of accumulation, (thought), and “the self” nourishing its own movement of psychological time. 

  23. Posted · Edited by Faceless

    47 minutes ago, Jack River said:

    This right here was crucial for me dude. I wasnt aware I kept feeding fear. 

    Indeed

    38 minutes ago, Jack River said:

    I use to think of fear partially. When I saw all the subtle forms it was overwhelming at first dude. Because I thought I had to do something about all this fear. But then I saw that the awareness was enough. It was so relieving dude. I felt like the weight of conflict just go away. 

    Yes..”the self” fuels that fear by moving away from itself as if the self were seperate from that fear. Movement in any direction by the self implies a movement of fear. “The i” doesn’t see that because it still is acting in accordance to the idea that it is distinct from positive and negative movement. 

  24. Posted · Edited by Faceless

    19 minutes ago, Faceless said:

    Conditioned (response-reaction) will go unnoticed because we will not be able to identify that which is positive-negative movement. 

    The more we are able to identify positive-negative movement of thought-self (fragmented action in movement), the greater awareness to that contradictory movement, the more complete-unlimited actions will be expressed as a result. 

    In seeing-understanding the whole of what is incoherent, there is complete action in which brings about coherent action.

    To understand that which is disorder, is action in and of itself, in which manifests as ORDER, (INTELLIGENT ACTION). 

    This holistic insight/perception is intelligent action, which is whole, (not influenced by fragmentation).