Mondsee

The Truth is obvious and unexciting

20 posts in this topic

Today I realized very clearly that there is no difference whatsoever between experience and experiencer. I did not start believing  it, I noticed it.

For something to exist, you must be the thing. Otherwise it cannot exist! Period. That's all.

The question that cracks it is: what is the difference between my experience of [whatever object] and the object itself? With some mental clarity you will notice, there is no difference whatsoever, your experience of the object is identical to the object itself, therefore, sure, you can say you are the object. It follows that you are everything that enters your perception.

Does that mean "I am Enlightened" now? What does that even mean? What I know is I am every single thing that is entering my perception, that's all. Don't be fooled... grasping that felt like the most obvious and unexciting thing. Do I feel special, magical, superior, or whatever? not at all.

Sure, it may feel unexciting at this point because I haven't investigated the implications more deeply. I'm curious to answer the following:

- Where are the things entering my perception coming from?
- Do I have any control over that?
- I understand that I am everything that enters my perception, but what am I if nothing at all is entering my perception? Can I be nothing?
- Can we even really become nothing without physically dying? In the end there are things entering our field of perception that we just cannot get rid of, such as breathing or the beating of our heart... therefore we must always be at leas that.

I hope to find answers to those questions soon 

Edited by Mondsee
Format

"Es gibt die Wahrheit, mein Lieber! Aber die ,Lehre', die du begehrst [...], die gibt es nicht. Du sollst dich auch gar nicht nach einer vollkommenen Lehre sehnen, Freund, sondern nach Vervollkommnung deiner selbst."

- Herman Hesse, Das Glasperlenspiel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do the work. 

Meditation is the way. 

Yes Truth is exciting. Like it really really is without a doubt. 

Good luck. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Mondsee It will be unexciting until you free yourself from rationalism. You can have all questions and answers you want and it will be nothing compared to the state of no questions and no answers.


unborn Truth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Mondsee That realization was my first spiritual mindfuck 5 years ago.

How is it possible that there are other people with their own experience?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mondsee said:

Today I realized very clearly that there is no difference whatsoever between experience and experiencer. I did not start believing  it, I noticed it.

For something to exist, you must be the thing. Otherwise it cannot exist! Period. That's all.

The question that cracks it is: what is the difference between my experience of [whatever object] and the object itself? With some mental clarity you will notice, there is no difference whatsoever, your experience of the object is identical to the object itself, therefore, sure, you can say you are the object. It follows that you are everything that enters your perception.

Does that mean "I am Enlightened" now? What does that even mean? What I know is I am every single thing that is entering my perception, that's all. Don't be fooled... grasping that felt like the most obvious and unexciting thing. Do I feel special, magical, superior, or whatever? not at all.

Sure, it may feel unexciting at this point because I haven't investigated the implications more deeply. I'm curious to answer the following:

- Where are the things entering my perception coming from?
- Do I have any control over that?
- I understand that I am everything that enters my perception, but what am I if nothing at all is entering my perception? Can I be nothing?
- Can we even really become nothing without physically dying? In the end there are things entering our field of perception that we just cannot get rid of, such as breathing or the beating of our heart... therefore we must always be at leas that.

I hope to find answers to those questions soon 

You still have a duality between perceiver and perception. You claim you are everything that is entering your perception. What you must do is inspect "I-ness" itself. What is the "I" that is clinging onto perceptions? Is "I" itself a perception?

More importantly, what is the difference between realness and perception? Why are you still using the word perception?

 

You have not inspected "Iness", "controlness" and "perceptionness". You are not everything that enters your perception, because "Youness" itself is a perception. The ego is a perception, not the other way around. Perceptions are not part of the ego.

 

You want to go more fundmental, question the very basis of how you come to understand reality. Question the very fabric of how you perceive perception, how you alter it by putting it into categories. You have to zoom out more, and then you have to reflect on the zooming out itself. Realizing that the altering, that the perceivingness itself stands on it's own. There is no "I" other than another perception which can dissappear. What is the difference between Redness and Iness?

Edited by Scholar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Mondsee lol experiencer and experience are one ?

So you experience the body so you are the body ?

You experience the thoughts - are you the thoughts ?

You breath - are you the breath ?

You see a grass are you the grass ? Or you see the picture of grass ?

If You the experiencer and what that you experience are same then that experience must be the same always changeless.Isnt it ?

Experience implies an object something experienced.

By defenition what you experience cannot be you isnt it ?

The perceived can never be the perceiver.

Find out who is that perceives ?

Are you directly experiencing or through the senses ?

If you perceive directly why are not perceiving the body world in deep sleep ?

Do you exist in deep sleep ? If you didnt exist during deep sleep how do you know you slept ?

Who is that which is aware of deep sleep ?

Pls answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mondsee said:

Where are the things entering my perception coming from?

If you realize the nonduality of experience / experiencer, you realize the nonduality of self & things too. 
- Do I have any control over that?

Duality: “ I “ & “that”.
- I understand that I am everything that enters my perception, but what am I if nothing at all is entering my perception?

Duality: “everything” enters “my perception”

Duality: “my” & “perception”

Can I be nothing?

Nothing can be anything, anything can be nothing. Duality: “everything” & “nothing”. 


- Can we even really become nothing without physically dying?

Are you, you?  Is it possible to “become”, you? 

In the end

May sound initially semantically critical (but it’s investigative) ... have you ever directly experienced an “end”....really?

Duality: “me” & “end”.

there are things entering our field of perception

Are there though?  Are there “things”, or are there arising thoughts of things? Are the thoughts that actual things? Are thoughts - things?

Is there any direct experience of “our” perception?   ...and is there any direct experience of the “entering”? 

Perhaps....it’s “going” the other way...rather than out to in - (“thing” “perceived” then “known”) Maybe that doesn’t fit as it is precisely backwards. 

that we just cannot get rid of

If there are not “things”, then there is not “getting rid of things”.

, such as breathing or the beating of our heart...

therefore we must always be at leas that.

Duality:  “we”, & “that”. 

 


  Nonduality & Meditations  Now

   “ ...every revolutionary act, is an act of love...”  - Zach de la Rocha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, tsuki said:

How is it possible that there are other people with their own experience?

To that I would answer: the same way that it is possible that you have 10 fingers each with their own experience!

5 hours ago, Scholar said:

You still have a duality between perceiver and perception. You claim you are everything that is entering your perception. What you must do is inspect "I-ness" itself. What is the "I" that is clinging onto perceptions? Is "I" itself a perception?

More importantly, what is the difference between realness and perception? Why are you still using the word perception?

All of this is just wording mumbo-jumbo. You can say that you are everything entering your perception, or simply say that you are everything. It's the same, just tricky to put it in words. "I" is not a perception, "I" is all there is!

Similarly, there is no difference between realness and perception... I am using the word to explain it somehow!

5 hours ago, Scholar said:

The ego is a perception, not the other way around. Perceptions are not part of the ego.

Yeah, I can agree with that, that's precisely why I am so curious about where (what I am calling) "the things entering my perception" are coming from!

5 hours ago, Jkris said:

@Mondsee lol experiencer and experience are one ?

So you experience the body so you are the body ?

You experience the thoughts - are you the thoughts ?

You breath - are you the breath ?

You see a grass are you the grass ? Or you see the picture of grass ?

If You the experiencer and what that you experience are same then that experience must be the same always changeless.Isnt it ?

Experience implies an object something experienced.

By defenition what you experience cannot be you isnt it ?

The perceived can never be the perceiver.

Find out who is that perceives ?

Are you directly experiencing or through the senses ?

If you perceive directly why are not perceiving the body world in deep sleep ?

Do you exist in deep sleep ? If you didnt exist during deep sleep how do you know you slept ?

Who is that which is aware of deep sleep ?

Pls answer.

- yes
- yes
- yes
- yes
- you are the blade of grass itself, not a picture of it, you are it
- why would it have to be changeless??
- that's precisely the point: there is no "experience" and "experienced" those two things are identical to each other
- "by definition" you can state whatever the hell you want :D that something is defined in a certain way is no guarantee whatsoever that it is true!
- there is no "who" perceiving! there is only what it is!
- "you", "the senses", and "the experience" all merge into one single thing, call it whatever you want
- that is what I am curious about... can we "be" nothing? whatever answer I give to that at this point would be intellectualizing about it, not in my direct experience... I don't understand this yet...


"Es gibt die Wahrheit, mein Lieber! Aber die ,Lehre', die du begehrst [...], die gibt es nicht. Du sollst dich auch gar nicht nach einer vollkommenen Lehre sehnen, Freund, sondern nach Vervollkommnung deiner selbst."

- Herman Hesse, Das Glasperlenspiel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Nahm

Duality: “ I “ & “that".

--> what I'm trying to say is what determines whatever there is??


"Es gibt die Wahrheit, mein Lieber! Aber die ,Lehre', die du begehrst [...], die gibt es nicht. Du sollst dich auch gar nicht nach einer vollkommenen Lehre sehnen, Freund, sondern nach Vervollkommnung deiner selbst."

- Herman Hesse, Das Glasperlenspiel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To those who have responded to this thread and seem to have some understanding of what I noticed... I'm curious about how you arrived at those insights. Spontaneously? Through meditation? Psychedelics? Self inquiry? Thanks :)


"Es gibt die Wahrheit, mein Lieber! Aber die ,Lehre', die du begehrst [...], die gibt es nicht. Du sollst dich auch gar nicht nach einer vollkommenen Lehre sehnen, Freund, sondern nach Vervollkommnung deiner selbst."

- Herman Hesse, Das Glasperlenspiel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mondsee said:

All of this is just wording mumbo-jumbo. You can say that you are everything entering your perception, or simply say that you are everything. It's the same, just tricky to put it in words. "I" is not a perception, "I" is all there is!


Similarly, there is no difference between realness and perception... I am using the word to explain it somehow!

I-ness is a very specific thing. It is identification. It is a very specific form and dimension of reality. I is not all there is, "all there is" is "all there is".

There can be something without anything that is "I". Nothing belongs to anything. All dimensions of reality are irreducable. Any mental framework is based on contradictions such as "X=Y". Notice how you are doing that, and how you are seeking to do so. You ask what something really is, where something really is coming from. All you really need to do is hold still and look at that which is.

4 minutes ago, Mondsee said:

Yeah, I can agree with that, that's precisely why I am so curious about where (what I am calling) "the things entering my perception" are coming from!

WYou still believe that "Coming from" is something else but a limited dimension of reality. Inspect "coming from-ness".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Mondsee stating one thing to you in general in regards to this:

The Truth is obvious and unexciting

 

the truth just is

it does not care about being exciting, unexciting, obvious or unobvious

It is NONE OF THE ABOVE and As a result, ALL OF THE ABOVE

 

there are also those who would say THE TRUTH IS SO EXCITING!

 

you cannot say what it IS and IS NOT

only what it SEEMS TO BE for YOU right NOW

 

and the ONE who declares the Truth to be Obvious and Exciting does not exist

 

So, no. "you" are NOT enlightened... YET.


"When you discover Stillness in the movement, and the Unchanging within the changing, then you have found your eternal home."
♥ Love ♥ Leads The Way...
Follow: https://www.instagram.com/ev3rsunny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Scholar said:

"all there is" is "all there is"

:)


"When you discover Stillness in the movement, and the Unchanging within the changing, then you have found your eternal home."
♥ Love ♥ Leads The Way...
Follow: https://www.instagram.com/ev3rsunny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Mondsee said:

To that I would answer: the same way that it is possible that you have 10 fingers each with their own experience!

My fingers don't disagree like we do! Knowledge, honey, how is it possible to share it if everything is one?

Edited by tsuki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

same belief that everyone is one , same operating system LOL 

unity much more than true knowledge, knowledge is infinite because we are nothing, how can nothing experience knowledge only we can. 

This is why we are advised to talk our highest truth, because it filters through each persons strange loop, letting go to a more expansive ego denstity. Therefore things take care of itself. We look to different sources to jump to the right "i" as were going up the strange loop only to find a total ground. 

The total ground is total and releving and that's okay. its the best place to be, because it raises everyone else up there too. 

Even the tower of babylon, tho they tried could not reach the skies to access heaven. 

Edited by Aakash

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Mondsee said:

@Nahm

Duality: “ I “ & “that".

--> what I'm trying to say is what determines whatever there is??

You do, but this question is from the perspective of the separate self. It is a fantastic question which few are courageous enough to genuinely ask. The question is however, asked from the standpoint or assumption, that there is a separate being, and that it made or makes a determination.  Upon being uncovered, the true self is all things, is known to be all things, and all things are known to be the very same knowing - unconditional, without duality, without the knowing of a thing...and thoughts, are things. Understanding is itself, Being, so the true self, Being, can not be understood - but rather only known, in the very same sense that you know you are you. Imagine a thought, a comment, even an emphatic speech - which could be so engrossing and moving - that it convinces you that you are not you. See the silliness of that example? You are you, nothing could take a primary order of that - because whatever that is - it is still ultimately just some thing -  known by you. It is what is, without determination, without thought. It might be helpful to say that rather than determination, there is intention, but still ‘intention’ only points to what has inevitably sprung from the very, very best, of you yourself. 

29 minutes ago, Mondsee said:

To those who have responded to this thread and seem to have some understanding of what I noticed... I'm curious about how you arrived at those insights. Spontaneously? Through meditation? Psychedelics? Self inquiry? Thanks :)

All of the above, and also through learning, experiencing, expanding understanding. Only for the sake of communication, perhaps the word ‘deconstruction’ has more “use”. When all is inspected, thoroughly, all is revealed to be dualities of thought & beliefs, paradigms & paradox of “identity”, ultimately arising at the duality of self & other. 

I feel it is only fair and honest to add, that in addition to what’s been expressed here... there is a meta, there’s no word for it, but to use one, maybe a non-dualistic- realm. Then, beyond that, there is the meta-actuality, the meta-how if you will, which is visible in the mind, yet inexpressibly “more real” than anything outside of it. 

It could be said that there is the collapsing of dualities of mind, and therefore the calming of the mind. Then there is the inquiry of the self, of the “ I “, and the true knowing, or “unification” (was never really two) of separate self, and true self. Then..there is the seeing of the “how” of the “ I “ and “ I ‘ s”, essentially, how One can by a limitless many, and how the many can appear so convincingly to be in one objective reality. Then there is the void & The Light, and “the tongue can not taste itself”. 

 

Is the top portion of your picture, the moon?


  Nonduality & Meditations  Now

   “ ...every revolutionary act, is an act of love...”  - Zach de la Rocha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Touche ,thanks i'll drop it. it consumes too much energy as an axiom anywhere. Although i've learnt how ideology and the mind works now through first hand experiences. I can see what your pointing to. Its not the ideology, its the fun of showing you how awe inspiring it is. its after all ... just another delusion. 

Edited by Aakash

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mondsee said:

"I" is all there is!

Here, "I" is deconstructed to Nothing / Everything. Since I is all there is, we don't need the "I" part - it is redundant. We simply have "all there is".

From this Nothing/Everything, observe how somethings are constructed. . . 

8 hours ago, Mondsee said:

Today I realized very clearly that there is no difference whatsoever between experience and experiencer. 

For something to exist, you must be the thing. Otherwise it cannot exist! Period. That's all.

Notice how the construction process has begun:

- "I" is all there is. . . to. . . 

- There is no difference between experience and experiencer. . . to. . . 

- For something to exist, you must be the thing. . . to. . . 

- your experience of the object is identical to the object itself, therefore, sure, you can say you are the object. It follows that you are everything that enters your perception.

If "I" is all there is. . . that's it. I is all there is. I is Everything. There is nothing else other than "I". Nothing to discover, perceive, figure out, attain, arrive it etc. It's all "I". Game Over. . . Yet, humans are not satisfied with "I is all there is". So we start constructing. Since the mind is not aware of the fully deconstructed state of "I", it will not be aware that it is constructing because it lacks the contrast of full deconstruction. 

So, let's deconstruct. If "I is all there is", why even have the "I" in there? What is "I" relative to? - I is all there is! It's redundant. It's like saying "Everything is all there is". Of course. So we can further deconstruct to "All there is". "All there is" means that there is nothing that isn't IS. So this is redundant as well. We can further deconstruct to "IS". This is as far as we can deconstruct through verbal communication. 

From "IS", we can start constructing, which is fine. Reality is a process of deconstruction and construction. Yet be aware that any construction we create, we can deconstruct it back down to "IS". 

You have constructed things called "experiences", "objects", "existence", "you", "things" and "perception". Humans are conditioned to assume these constructs. Yet notice how enormous the jump is from "IS" to "experiences, objects, existence, you, things, perception etc". This enormous jump took millions of years of evolution.

Based on these constructs, you have asked questions: 

8 hours ago, Mondsee said:

I'm curious to answer the following:

- Where are the things entering my perception coming from?
- Do I have any control over that?
- I understand that I am everything that enters my perception, but what am I if nothing at all is entering my perception? Can I be nothing?
 

Notice how we started off with "I is all there is", created a foundation of constructs and are now asking questions based on those constructs. You can use questions to deconstruct back to "IS" or you can ask questions to create more elaborate constructs.

The deconstruction route: Notice how the above has "things" and "my perception". We can deconstruct that so "things" and "my perception" are not separate. Now things, my and perception is One. So "things" don't come from anywhere, because there is no thing to come from one thing to another thing. . . For the question "Do I have any control over that?", there is separation between "I" and "that" and a new thing added called "control". That can all get deconstructed back to "I is all there is". . . Thus, "I" is Everything. Not "everything that enters my perception". Everything. 

If you deconstruct to the full monty to Everything = Nothing and embody that, you will see how you are constructing all of reality. It's all constructions which are deconstructed to Everything/Nothing. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is what it is, this is non-axiomatic meaning that the condictions are just to take it as a belief. 

even if i went the full whammy, the same problem would occur. The situation is not solved. As highly developed people, therefore the only person to turn to is right here, right now to verify this all together. Which assumes taking on the belief as this process is currently doing. 

Spiritualist solve situations, Blues not so much. 

especially the problem of "i" ,   the truth is belief is the exact same thing as saying is. we just have to agree upon it. if we all agreed that we were living in an imagination, then what would be the problem of accepting this notion you see? and even going one further? to then play up the notion for the fun of it? any back-rations do not help. as you could say "is" doesn't need a reason. so it doesn't need a reason to tell you either, so it hasn't. You could say that my reactivity is choosing for it. But wouldn't you rather know ? its just that, What is the truth LOL 

were looking all the time, for a substance. Now we found that substance, we say now what? it's nothing. so the truth is nothing. But what was the truth ? it was subjective. truth is what you make it to be and it has been exactly so... to say your not part of the story IS the very rationality your using to say its not important. The same as i am saying we are. We are on equal ground. SO what is the absolute truth? we still haven't answered it! LOOL! 

 

Edited by Aakash

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now