not-knowing = just BEing ?

[SoonHei]

yes... no real mover...

hence why the mover was in quotes 'mover'

it is in retrospect that the labels like a "mover" are assigned on the assumed position.. for the sake of talking about it.

[Aakash]

4 minutes ago, SoonHei said:

it is in retrospect that the labels like a "mover" are assigned on the assumed position.. for the sake of talking about it.

Who says your assumed position is 100% truth? 

[Nahm]

@SoonHei So well said.   Then there is no mind.  Then there is Meta No Mind. 

[SoonHei]

@Aakash i think due to this not being a live face 2 face talk. you're maybe confused about what i am saying.

i am able to see what it is you're saying. and i'm saying the same thing

potato - poTAto

 

that assumed position is not TRUE. i was talking about the moment one falls back into ignorance or identification with the I.. with identification, there is someone who moves - thus the 'mover' 

the mover is the assumed position which never was

there is movement and the mover is part of that / one with that

and 'mover' is an abstraction of the whole movement ... there is no static singular entity of a mover

thought is that abstraction which creates the mover in the whole of movement. thought IS the Mover.

[Aakash]

1 minute ago, SoonHei said:

that assumed position is not TRUE. i was talking about the moment one falls back into ignorance or identification with the I.. with identification, there is someone who moves - thus the 'mover' 

the mover is the assumed position which never was

there is movement and the mover is part of that / one with that

and 'mover' is an abstraction of the whole movement ... there is no static singular entity of a mover

thought is that abstraction which creates the mover in the whole of movement. thought IS the Mover.

we're not, i'm saying who says this is 100% true? 

[SoonHei]

2 minutes ago, Nahm said:

@SoonHei So well said.   Then there is no mind.  Then there is Meta No Mind. 

yes. the meta sees the no-mind

it's not TRUE meta... (cannot be because it is IT) but meta will do for the sake of talking

@Nahm

 

[Nahm]

@SoonHei Perfect. ♥️

[zeroISinfinity]

1 hour ago, Nahm said:

Do me a solid....tell me I don’t know shit. Feel it though. Don’t bullshit yourself. Put your heart into it. 

This goes for all enlightenment philosophers. 

Practises! 

Especially those who want to put Infinite Self in categories based on otherings.

[SoonHei]

@zeroISinfinity lovely artwork! or is that a parrot?

 

[Aakash]

17 minutes ago, SoonHei said:

yes. the meta sees the no-mind

it's not TRUE meta... (cannot be because it is IT) but meta will do for the sake of talking

it doesn't change your position, even you saying this LOL. you haven't understood the fundamentals from which you derived such an answer and whom you derived it from. 

in reality, your adding confirmation biased to your own reality... even if you believe the meta is doing the talking for you. it will reinforce for you. 

unconditional love breeds self-deception. 

Edited August 6, 2019 by Aakash

[Aakash]

13 minutes ago, zeroISinfinity said:

This goes for all enlightenment philosophers. 

Practises! 

Especially those who want to put Infinite Self in categories based on otherings.

unconditional love breeds self-deception breeds totality breeds absolutists breeds false equivalencies

[Mu_]

2 hours ago, SoonHei said:

is that what it is?
losing yourself in the moment totally... where the attention isn't zero-ed in on any 1 particular part/abstraction of the experience. but the whole of it... 

and YOU have no knowledge really of the contents as you're simply taking in raw experience, moment to moment. ?

 

and if there is some conversation taking place... it's sort of like you're day dreaming or zoned out... yet when it is "your" body's turn to speak... it speaks on its own accord... just like while driving, the body drives on its own after you drive enough times... or like riding a bike...

the mechanics of how you're operating a car now as an expert is unknown to you... (effortless action) 

is that what unknowing / not-knowing is when it comes to totally being in the moment?

YOU do not know what is going to happen next... yet the body/mind is an active participant in the next moment while a task/role/words of its own.

 

 

i ask this as I find practice of going within myself during regular interactions and not just in quite meditation sits.

i feel as if i am zoned out... yet i am talking and replying back to the person i am speaking with... but have no memory really about what was just talked about...

is having little/no-memory also part of unknowing? 

One finds one does not need to remember and all intelligent action simply arises as YOU recede more and more backwards / within.

In reality, everything is just being.  What your describing is a quality of such.....

[zeroISinfinity]

@Aakash Pure Love is the Ultimate Truth. 

That is what YOUR True Self is. 

This false one that wants to argue with perceived "me" and wants to prove something is a lie. Let go. 

Practises. 

Would just add this picture for @Nahm

This is how "actualizing" is perceived. Lol

Vacation, sure. ?

Edited August 6, 2019 by zeroISinfinity

[Aakash]

@zeroISinfinity YOU ARE NOT HUMAN! 

THIS IS unconditionally love telling pure love that it is not pure enough! 

you don't get how tricky it is, that's the problem really. 

I'm not arguing that things happen how they will. 

but you don't understand that your own position, to not be involved IS A POSITION ITSELF

its free will

Edited August 6, 2019 by Aakash

[SoonHei]

26 minutes ago, Mu_ said:

everything is just being.

@Mu_  BEing.

 

CHANGE is the one constant... so imagine if reality without change - if experience could be "paused" / frozen: BE

with change (as it always has been): BEing

 

even the freezing/paused experiences of eternity are BEing 

and that's because I AM the ONE TRUE CONSTANT. 

The Change-less.

[Aakash]

@Mu_ @SoonHei  both of you don't actually realise what it being means for god. 

This is why your enlightenments are sub par. 

[SoonHei]

@Aakash  both of you don't actually realise what it being means for god. 

distinctions/concepts ^^^

cannot realise yourself...

can only be yourself.

[Aakash]

9 minutes ago, SoonHei said:

an only be yourself

But what does this MEAN! 

 

[SoonHei]

@Aakash it means what you want it to... even if it means something else.

[Aakash]

@SoonHei let me rephrase 

what does being in spirituality terms mean