BigSkyDiamond

the attachment to being human, and being useful, and attachment to the Cosmos (the universe and everything in it) is an obstacle to moving forward. It is illustrated in a most clear, interesting, and literal way as described above with the imagery that Beingness is retreating. That view or picture or relative perspective could also be seen as the human going backwards or not getting closer or not making progress. The other barrier is an indicated resistance and aversion to "unchanging" as a characteristic of Beingness. This statement is an obstacle: "An unchanging Absolute has no interests/experiences - and therefore no interest in whether humans are useful in the Cosmos." (Absolute as it is used in this discussion corresponds to Beingness, i use them interchangeably, depending on the framework and participants) The barriers and obstacles indicated above are of no concern if a person is fine where they are and content with exploring the cosmos in various roles and adventures . No one else can choose or impose a belief system, we each get to script our own based on what fits best for us. The frame of reference needs to resonate and reflect what we see as most important, compelling, engaging, fulfilling. what is seen as a barrier for someone on one path, may well be a priority for someone on another path. it's like ice cream, we get to choose the flavor that tastes the best.

a. within the worlds of Separation yes b. but outside the worlds of Separation no c. within the universe and everything in it yes d. that statement (restriction, limitation) in blue box is itself conditioned and limited by the limited parameters of the worlds of Separation e. however outside the worlds of Separation those limits are not in effect f. so then it is experiencing as the Absolute. and not as the Relative.

all of those listed above though still occupy the worlds of Separation, they are still part of "the universe and everything in it" and are thus still limited. The universe and everything in it includes both physical and non-physical life forms and beings. A person can't die themselves into Realization. Nor can they Awaken by simply staying in non-physical life forms as any of the visions listed above. No, there is nothing beyond the Absolute but there is a whole lot that is not within the worlds of Separation (the universe and everything in it). Which is not manifested at all. The limited human brain literally can not imagine or conceive what that is or what it looks like. But we can recognize that it exists. There is nothing beyond the Absolute but we can experience whatever we experience as the absolute without the density and incompatibility and limitations of "the universe and everything in it."

wallowing in Dao i note that marshy meadow sounds like marshmallow

That is a great story !

too funny !!! that's what's so great about no time no space no form: it can't be measured !

it seems to be that: since the Absolute is not bound or limited by time space and form, then the Absolute can also express in ways that are not bound by time space and form. The worlds of Separation (which are bound by time space and form) are an expression of the Absolute. But certainly are not the only expression of the Absolute. i agree that from the perspective of the physical human form, the predominant view is limited to and circumscribed by "the universe and everything in it." Is there something beyond that? Of course. The bread crumb trail left for us indicates this. Otherwise there would not be a distinction made between the Absolute and the relative. With the distinctly different set of attributes for each clearly and consistently spelled out. That which is limited and finite and illusory the formed the created the born the physical the changing that which has a beginning and an end (the relative); simply can not also be the extent or parameters of that which is infinite unborn unformed uncreated unchanging and unlimited (the Absolute). The Absolute is far too vast for that very narrow limited range of expression. Therefore the Absolute also expresses in other ways. Which are not limited by time space and form. The Absolute is not a one-trick pony.

love me some Marley, British name for pleasant woods or marshy meadow.

Cobie i would give you ten hearts if i could. maybe i can ❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️

it is not the end of me as infinite unborn uncreated unformed unchanging no beginning no end no time no space no form always was and always will be. (Absolute) but it IS the end of me thinking the thought of universe and everything in it so that ends (Relative) the belief the thought that Separation is real ends (Relative) inhabiting ever again the universes and everything in them ends (Relative)

Yes, I concur. And if the universe and everything in it is "all in my head" and "thoughts I am thinking" then it is much more manageable and accessible. I find that quite comforting, less threatening. My favorite people are aspects of myself, and the seeming villains are parts of myself asking for attention and in need of comfort and healing. It is delightful actually, (A friend once told me laughing, "You have a rich inner life." I rather like that.)

Does this not also include form, i.e that which is physical? whether that is the physical human body or the universe and everything in it. Doesn't it follow also that too is a mental construction? if space and time are "illusory" "a mental construct" then isn't form also illusory since form is reliant upon space. without time and space there can be no form. following this further: then if (since) form is also an illusory mental construct (physical anything everything is "just a thought") then that connects to the Buddhist teaching of ending completely the cycle of reincarnation, and stepping out of it altogether. if (since) there is no past and no time and no future, then neither are there past lives nor future lives. when i recognize there is no body, then there also is no karma, nothing to work off, nothing to burn off.

thank you for the response and references. This is helpful. I appreciate it. The part that jumps out at me is this: Does this not also include form, i.e that which is physical? whether that is the physical human body or the universe and everything in it. Doesn't it follow also that too is a mental construction? if space and time are "illusory" "a mental construct" then isn't form also illusory since form is reliant upon space. without time and space there can be no form. that is what naturally follows for me, and what i bump up against. It doesn't bother me,though, i am fine with it, it is in harmony for me.

i responded earlier in the thread also, but here in concise form. from Tzvi Freeman: "That is the starting place of Torah, and the first approach of even the simplest Jew—that there is really nothing else but God."

these are great insights and resources, thank you so much. Including the other thread that was linked to. This is exactly what i was looking for. Now I can not-cling to it and un-grasp the questions i had . my own personal outpicturing of 'Ask and ye shall receive.' and 'Before you ask it is already done.'

Yes !!! I heard that in an Eckhart Tolle video on you tube. Now i know the source. He draws on different traditions including Zen (with great humor). Thank you!

i knew a guy who did Pa Kua. He then went on to learn acupuncture and is now a Doctor of Oriental Medicine (DOM) .

that is not what i said. The teaching i mentioned was that in a religious context it is taught that women (in general) are closer to Divintiy than men are, and that it comes easier for women, it is more natural for women. And men have more work to do and farther to go to reach the level that women are already at. That is not saying that women are more advanced. an anlogy might be for instance men by nature have greater upper body strength than women do. For women to build upper body strength they have more work to do and farther to go, to reach a level that men already are at. But that does not mean that men are more advanced. Just that they have greater upper body strength.

it's a process for me of identifying what resonates with me. i figure there are lots of paths so that there is then something well suited for each and everyone.

i read in the article that they are impermanent. I associate impermanent with finite, changing, has a beginning and an end. Whereas i associate infinite with unchanging, permanent, no beginning no end. the physical form ends. the feeling of delight ends. sense perceptions end when a person loses their hearing or sight. What am i mis-understanding? If it is saying instead that "the process of changing contines without end goes on and on" then i get that. maybe something like a human body begins and ends (is conceived born and dies) and is thus finite. However the cycle of humans living and dying, birth and death continues without end. like that? Form is impermanentFeeling is impermanentPerception is impermanentMental formations are impermanentSense-consciousness is impermanent

That is a great take-away. For me in this moment i would feel a great sense of relief by letting go of that which i do not understand. That is looking like a really attractive option for me. Somewhere a long time ago i heard something that stuck with me and it comes to mind now: "Delete the need to understand."

Thank you Keith!

bold above, that is a big piece. thank you for clearing that up for me. good to know. so we sort of come in at the middle while the process or cycle is already in place. OK, i can do that. Moving on to timeless. regarding the 5 things listed, [form, feelings, perception, impulses, sense-consciousness], they are all "changing." they all come and go, they all have a beginning and an end, they are all finite. They are all impermanent. (Using the article at link provided, yes it is helpful.) Since they are all impermanent, then they can not be timeless. So then, what is it that is timeless what are the characteristics? or is it just the process itself of cause and effect that is timeless (it just keeps cycling through) . Since the 5 things listed are not-self, and "There is no self in the created or the uncreated" then what is left for self to be? is there no "true self" at all in Buddhism? What is it then that reincarnates? And when we end the cycle of reincarnation altogether since there is no self do we just blink out and cease to exist? This helps me a lot to understand. Thank you everyone for patience with my questions and information provided. I appreciate it a lot. If a concept does not exist in this framework, then that is helpful too, that also provides clarity.

in a traumatic situation (yes parents screaming at each other is yes a traumatic situation for children) a child will say whatever is demanded of them or expected of them, to ensure their own safety and survival. In a family situation where parents are screaming at each other, the kids learn early on what to say and do, what NOT to say or do. And also they are told what they feel and what they do not feel. The child in that situation does not have a voice and is not safe. is the incident described triggering for me? Yes it is. Do I find it disturbing? Yes i do. I am a grown up now, and I do have a voice now. I am using the voice that i have now, to say what i just said above.

I guess I am not understanding this in the Buddhist context. more questions i guess: Is there a source or first cause in Buddhism? in a general sense i am seeking to understand in the Buddhist context the relationship between the physical (body) and the non-physical (essence? pure awareness? the part that reincarnates?) Buddhism does encompass not just reincarnation but also leaving the cycle of reincarnation, permanently. So that relationship.