I am enlightened; sincere seekers ask me anything in relation to the path

[Jack River]

11 minutes ago, DrewNows said:

Would you say in this sense meditation is synonymous with attention? 

Or is it more of a result of holistic understanding? 

It’s seemed to be the holistic insight/understanding lead to the understanding of what is inattention. To see the entire “movement” of thought and its reaction (emotion/thought cause and effect process/nature. To recognize all the ways self resists what is in experience. Which allows later for a psychological stop of self with its movement. 

Meditation started at that which allowed for the unconditioned observation/learning/attention. 

Observation/learning/attention is meditation to me. 

 

Edited November 16, 2018 by Jack River

[Emanyalpsid]

16 minutes ago, Jack River said:

Well..

Who’s focusing?

Or are “my” thoughts mine? 

 

 

I know what you mean, but the thing with the Buddha was that he went very deep and saw that the whole of reality didn't exist upon itself, not only the self. So he saw that we are not only not-self, whole of reality is not-self. By thinking it exists upon itself it is part of ourself. It is only out of ignorance, or not-knowing, that we hang on to something like attention and believe that it is unconditioned and exists upon itself. And I don't mean the concept attention but the actual experience. In other words you cling to it but don't see that there is nothing to cling to as it does not exist upon itself.

Edited November 16, 2018 by Emanyalpsid

[Jack River]

6 minutes ago, Emanyalpsid said:

know what you mean, but the thing with the Buddha was that he went very deep and saw that the whole of reality didn't exist upon itself, not only the self. So he saw that we are not only not-self, whole of reality is not-self. It is only out of ignorance, or not-knowing, that we hang on to attention and believe that it is unconditioned and exists upon itself. And I don't mean the concept attention but the actual experience. In other words you cling to it but don't see that there is nothing to cling to as it does not exist upon itself.

I feel ya. That's why I agreed with you before on your original posts. I'm with you dude or dudet ?

The relative aspect of it all. 

Edited November 16, 2018 by Jack River

[Emanyalpsid]

8 hours ago, Jack River said:

I feel ya. That's why I agreed with you before on your original posts. I'm with you dude or dudet ?

The relative aspect of it all. 

Not quite, with reality I mean everything we experience, including consciousness. So, when someone reaches Nirvana, sees through this non-existence, every concept, phenomenon, experience, object, etc. is empty of an essence, because it is conditioned. 

However in your mind attention is unconditioned. You don't know how to explain it, but you tried to define it by trying to explain what it is and what it is not. Therefore you posted in this topic, to verify if we experience something similar. You did however not go into my questions how you know if it is unconditioned and if it is always present. You don't investigate it, because you believe it exists upon itself. You identify with attention, you are attention.

If you believe something exists upon itself, you can give meaning to it through itself. That is the deepest level of the self. The self is the believe in itself, so one does not realizes this until one does. However, you know I can only point you to something, you have to figure it out for yourself. If you want too of course.

 

Edited November 17, 2018 by Emanyalpsid

[Blissout]

Did you end suffering? are you in a state of permanent peace?

 

[Jack River]

6 hours ago, Emanyalpsid said:

Not quite, with reality I mean everything we experience, including consciousness. So, when someone reaches Nirvana, sees through this non-existence, every concept, phenomenon, experience, object, etc. is empty of an essence, because it is conditioned. 

However in your mind attention is unconditioned. You don't know how to explain it, but you tried to define it by trying to explain what it is and what it is not. Therefore you posted in this topic, to verify if we experience something similar. You did however not go into my questions how you know if it is unconditioned and if it is always present. You don't investigate it, because you believe it exists upon itself. You identify with attention, you are attention.

If you believe something exists upon itself, you can give meaning to it through itself. That is the deepest level of the self. The self is the believe in itself, so one does not realizes this until one does. However, you know I can only point you to something, you have to figure it out for yourself. If you want too of course.

 

I’m not sure you get what I’m talking about when I say attention. Simply there is no desire/effort/control/controller/resistance. And because of that there seems to arise this seeing. There are not constructed barriers imposed resistance which means all that attachment falls away. An actual complete attention that understands the whole of it. This means Not seeing through the veil of self. No labeling naming. There’s no more of that. That simple. 

There are no distinctions while actually attentive between attentive and not attentive. No meaning no identification. There is no that in comparison to this and such. Once that attention stops, then all such movement seems to arise again. The veil of self seems to fall back in. Then attantion may arise again. The point is attention comes about when desire/effort/becoming/control/resistance. No movement of reaction/action within the loop cycle of self. No more thought. Even as this deepens recording does not even seem to take place. Time gaps gets gnarly. Real gnarly. This seems to be the most difficult thing “to do”. 

 Now it’s all conditioned as all things are conditioned. A kind of mutual interdependence and such. But no matter the case the what is is. 

Anyway, I can’t really explain it simpler than that yet. Maybe soon. 

Edited November 17, 2018 by Jack River

[Emanyalpsid]

We speak two different languages in English. You have your own concepts and a way that they sound logic to you. I use concepts from various fields; psychology, philosophy, buddhism etc. because most people use them, so we can understand each other. You however, have your own concepts, which I dont know about and dont understand, and logic, which I can't follow.

So if you wish that people who use the concepts I use to understand you, you are going to have to learn them. If we dive in your language we have to invent language all over again as most concepts are thought out of in our language. That is the advantage of using a method.

If you don't want to then don't. 

[Emanyalpsid]

3 hours ago, Blissout said:

Did you end suffering? are you in a state of permanent peace?

 

What is suffering for you and what is peace?

[Jack River]

1 hour ago, Emanyalpsid said:

I use concepts from various fields; psychology, philosophy, buddhism etc

Actually I would say the majority of world/society doesn’t get into study “psychology, philosophy, Buddhism. 

1 hour ago, Emanyalpsid said:

So if you wish that people who use the concepts I use to understand you, you are going to have to learn them

Or can we say we need to unlearn various traditional concepts? 

There are people who understand this vary easily. It’s to understand it as phenomenon/movement or a process. If someone understands themselves it’s really simple to follow. 

1 hour ago, Emanyalpsid said:

That is the advantage of using a method.

It would be most excellent if consciousness totlay stoped looking to authority to end itself and its conflict/divison be free without its content. Imagine a consciousness that didn’t have to look to thought tho free itself. That would be great wouldn’t it. Real freedom?

[Jack River]

I am Sorry though, I don’t notice any concepts I am using as being to difficult. Sometimes a communication is difficult, that’s just the way it is. 

There are people who will like to get wrapped up in the intellectual side of this, and there are the usual day to day joe’s who will not. No way(method) seems to me to be the most direct way to understanding/SEEING.

Once we learn through a technique/method/system we understand/see through that system and we have difficulty communicating that system/method/technique to others who have opposing systems.

Imagine if all of that was left behind. It would be ultimate freedom. From the very beginning seeing the falsness in conforming to an authority/tradition/ that handed down though thought to save the entity created by thought... It would be awesome. 

People have done the whole looking to thought to transcend thoughts inherent limits, and man kind is still the same. Maybe we can end all that. Consciousnesses at a point to where it doesn’t have to do all that. As all that can be seen as resistance to death. 

Imagine not having to read a single word from various texts, look to any teacher, follow any way. Because in all actuality that is what causes the divison between the experiencer and the experience and sustains conflict/suffering. 

Anyway this is how I see it dude. Either way I love you ?

Edited November 17, 2018 by Jack River

[Emanyalpsid]

I got your point earlier, but I was trying to show you some differences, advantages and disadvantages and asked you some questions for you to see this. You however don't seem to respond to what I'm trying to show you or are not trying. Thats fine, but I'm not going to repeat myself constantly.

Language has its advantages and disadvantages in trying to spread knowledge. 

It is not the method that is wrong, it are the people who use it that dont understand it.

Your method is the same as every other method, besides that yours is not verified and improved over generations.

You seem to think that your thoughts are free, that you are the thinker of your thoughts and therefore if you dont have to think in terms with what other people say you are free. 

The self, at its core, is for every human the same. Therefore language is useful in explaining how people can dissolve it. You have the advantage of the ability to go deep into a subject over multiple generations and the disadvantage of people not understanding the concepts which are used. However the concepts used in a method are a very useful guide for people who are already thinking. And people who are not thinking are also not interested in following a method as they are already there.

Of course your method has the advantage of not being lost in concepts in language, but you have the major disadvantage that you are trying to invent the wheel for yourself. Maybe you have built a wheel, but if you meet other people it could be that they already have a car. You however will not be able to understand how they got there as you don't speak their language.

For example, I did not follow the traditional buddhist path, most of my insights came from using psychedelics. You seem to think that authority is something bad, it is also a way of progress if it comes from someone being the first to do or see something. It depends upon the people who look at the authority if the authority has any power. Therefore, the buddha is not worshipped. The only thing of interest is his method.

Your suggestion is wishful thinking. Don't misinterpret my message as critique. I have a lot of respect if you got where you came without using a different method. But even your words, you have not invented yourself. If you have some self invented words, you used letters out of an existing alphabet. See where I'm going with this? And I believe from your posts in this topic you have not completely dissolved the self yet, which I tried to show you.

But hey, if you are happy, what are we talking about?

 

Edited November 17, 2018 by Emanyalpsid

[Jack River]

1 hour ago, Emanyalpsid said:

Your method is the same as every other method, besides that yours is not verified and improved over generations.

The “me” and the method is the same process. That’s the point. 

1 hour ago, Emanyalpsid said:

You seem to think that your thoughts are free, that you are the thinker of your thoughts and therefore if you dont have to think in terms with what other people say you are free. 

No, that’s not what I’m saying

 

1 hour ago, Emanyalpsid said:

Of course your method has the advantage of not being lost in concepts in language, but you have the major disadvantage that you are trying to invent the wheel for yourself.

The method/the wheel/the me all one “movement” of time/thought. 

1 hour ago, Emanyalpsid said:

You seem to think that authority is something bad, it is also a way of progress if it comes from someone being the first to do or see something

When I speak of authority I mean adherence to thought in any way to solve psychological problems. Which means all the ways that man kind has invented to solve its psychological problems. All “ways” or “how do I’s” fall in that category. Anything invented as a way to end psychological conflict/suffering (freedom) by means of knowledge/experience that is accumulated and conformed to as a means. That could be tradition texts, psychedelics, teachers and teachings, and even the authority of our own experience/knowledge, as in memory. All of that is conforming to an authority to me. The authority of self/thought is the most difficult to dissolve fosho. 

The point is, participation in that is the “movement” of “self”. The self is it’s accumulated knowledge/experience. The path is the self. The seeker is the seeking. There is a direct insight into this that doesn’t depend on any time/authority at all. But a holistic seeing it it’s falsenss. Intelligent action ends that movement of falsity instantly. 

 

1 hour ago, Emanyalpsid said:

 But even your words, you have not invented yourself. If you have some self invented words, you used letters out of an existing alphabet

Fosho, all that is the result of thought and thought is never new. Thought seems to be nothing other than invention.

This creativeness or mysteriousness is meditation/attention. That is what creative is, the death of the old, so there is the new. 

Edited November 17, 2018 by Jack River

[Jack River]

Seems to me, the most direct way is no way 

The way is the self. Insight sees the whole of this and ends it instantly/totlay. It’s most excellent fosho. 

To negate all that of reality(the method, the technique, the system, all that of the thinker, experiencer, doer,(thought). Freedom. 

The path is the “me”.

Does it take a path to die?

..or is the holding to a path resistance to death?  

Edited November 17, 2018 by Jack River

[Emanyalpsid]

I don't understand your language and the meaning you give to concepts. But you are also not realy engaging into conversation, but more holding a conversation with yourself. You use sentences like; it seems to me that.... 

So I will stop here. Peace man.

[Jack River]

23 minutes ago, Emanyalpsid said:

But you are also not realy engaging into conversation, but more holding a conversation with yourself.

Fosho. I am having a conversation with myself. 

I remember thinking the same thing you are now about not understanding the concepts or “language”. But I found out that was not the case. I just wasn’t seeing through the concepts/language. I was just there 3 or more months ago. Everything I said is simple once seen holistically and it makes total sense. It’s not an understanding gathered by understanding concept/language, but can be seen easier as insight into “movement” one unit of Time/thought in motion. 

But thank you for talking to me. You rock dude?

Edited November 17, 2018 by Jack River

[Jack River]

There are a few others on the forum who get exactly what I mean too. Maybe with some time it will be clearer. 

Edited November 17, 2018 by Jack River

[Emanyalpsid]

21 minutes ago, Jack River said:

Fosho. I am having a conversation with myself. 

 

I dont know where you are from, but where I'm from this is seen as asocial and rude. 

5 minutes ago, Jack River said:

There are a few others on the forum who get exactly what I mean too. Maybe with some time it will be clearer. 

I got the essence of what you were saying, however you did not get my points, but how could you.

[Jack River]

18 minutes ago, Emanyalpsid said:

dont know where you are from, but where I'm from this is seen as asocial and rude. 

Only when we hold an image of what is not rude does that tend to happen. No image no prob.  

I’m not trying to be rude. I meant it though. 

[Jack River]

21 minutes ago, Emanyalpsid said:

dont know where you are from, but where I'm from this is seen as asocial and rude. 

“I” am from nowhere and I am nothing

[DrewNows]

@EmanyalpsidThe "teaching" in which Jack expresses was not of his own invention however it is the only way in which he knows how to express his holistic understanding. Maybe he brings it up to see if your "enlightenment" would allow you to reflect on his direct experience of self/no self. Have you heard of Jiddu Krishnamurti? as well as david bolm? (Many youtube videos exploring how this "language" works...)

also i linked you a few threads the other day which expresses this type of "language" 

 

@Jack Rivermost excellent posts dude, pity its been such a challenge communicating it