deci belle Posted October 26, 2013 Seeing is immediate knowledge bypassing the thinking/feeling self-reifying psychological apparatus. There is a deeper application of the taoist analytic device of host and guest where the seat of knowledge is the host and intellect is the guest, which is the index of the return of normalcy to the organism. Delusion is the typical relationship between ego/aware nature whereby thought imagines itself to overarch immediate knowledge. As its characteristically habit-centered function calcifies, real knowledge becomes inaccessible to the organism. Don Juan Matus, a Yaqui adept of a Toltec tradition of the nature of perception who lived in northern Mexico and the subject of the first few books by Carlos Castañeda, described the difference between the man of knowledge and an ordinary person as a warrior's predilection for realizing the totality of the being that going to die and the ability to see. So those on this forum who cannot contain their intellectually despotic inability to conceptualize the nature of what I write about and must therefore be driven toward attempting its obstruction need only see that they themselves are trying to categorize a vast ungraspable mystery that has no beginning, inside or outside by the capacities of a puny morality lorded over by an utterly leaden self-identity that has never experienced self-nurture other than by an excentric self-pity. It (intellect) is entirely inadequate for the task of entering the tao. All the authentic traditions of the world's mystery teachings of the nature of awareness require an arduous (for some) self-refinement process to re-orient the mental makeup of the individual to enable the possibility of entry into the inconceivable nature of reality. Anyone who believes in their own separate ultimate identity creates it themselves. As for those who practice floating around in a void, they are only entertaining the empty consciousness of ageless thievery. This is not your shining mind~ it's just your mirror-in-a-bubble, itself floating within the confines of eternity. This is not freedom. Seeing is simply not using the selfish psychological apparatus to witness creation in terms of karmic evolution which results in immediate knowledge of reality as is, true Thusness, in everyday ordinary situations. There is no need for the mental masturbation described above. Life is short. Spend it in the here-and-now, please. There is no other time, there is no other reality, and there is no other mind. Really!! As simple as it is, seeing requires the fundamental refinement of the identity of the being that is going to die. Since it is a process of reversion that reverses the karmic evolution of the created universe within the aspect of the individual-as-reflection fundamentally undifferentiated from the whole of creation, that process is an audacious, precise undertaking that has nothing to do with an effortless, sudden realization of your essential nature. Why? The function of enlightening being is natural— as natural as ego's usurping of the seat of awareness seems to you right now. Reversion to the basis is simply being natural. This is all a person can do. This is the comprehension of self-refinement. The sudden is not the doing of people, it is the product of celestial timing. Therefore, the saying goes: "Refine the self and await the time." It can happen whether you are ready or not, so don't let it go to waste. Anticipating unity is a dead-end. Just refine the self to activate the function of enlightening being no different than your own mind before the first thought. It is simply possible to do so, and no one knows why. It is not possible to understand it, as it is inconceivability itself. Attempting to do so is the insanity of Icarus. Not-understanding the mystery of entry into the mystery of awareness is the prerequisite to arrival. Just this much is as much seeing as one can ever do. Know that seeing is not a self-reflective habit energy relative to doing. No one does seeing. Seeing is reality alternately responsive or hidden; being that is awareness itself. This is the unattributable~ not the sense-organ. I hope I have made if perfectly clear for the literalists and pedants that one enters the tao in reality by virtue of not thinking it can be thought about. Precisely, it is just in not-thinking. When one gets this, one has found the world is a resting-place within oneself. Don't think about it.❤ 6 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
suninmyeyes Posted October 26, 2013 Thanks Deci . I was hoping you were going to write something soon yesterday .. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bearded Dragon Posted December 7, 2013 I was driving home last night and I stopped looking out but rather let everything come to me. It felt like I was still and everything else was just going by and doing its own thing. It was very normal in terms of what I could see to be honest, but more like my mind shrunk to a point where it could look on things more externally. You could possibly compare it to one of those time-lapse videos where the observer is slow and you have traffic which is fast (merely in terms of how it felt I guess), but rather than a difference of speed it was a difference of perspective where there is still a connection to the environment but you are just merely observing rather than being thrown in the middle of it. Then it went away and I started looking for it which was never going to work. Hah! Such is life. The idea that it is not the sense organ is helpful. Concentration on external stimulus is a form of doing, which I neglected to notice until reading this. When I let go of that I feel a distinct release of energy and a change of perspective. Kind of seems like I'm looking from the back of my eyes also, but that's probably irrelevant. The only thing I was a bit worried about was focus. I was just as aware of things as I normally was, but it was more like my awareness was spread out. Kind of like when you look using peripheral vision and you don't have the same ability to deal with things right in front of you. It wasn't the same as this, but more like my awareness was spread and not so much my vision (although I think there was a little bit of that also). I guess I may have snapped out of it because I lost focus on straight ahead which is clearly a bad thing while driving. Perhaps it's not so bad. I used to phase out while driving which in hindsight seems 100x worse. I don't really have any questions but if you think you could add anything helpful then I'm all ears . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
deci belle Posted December 7, 2013 Nice insights, BD! Kind of seems like I'm looking from the back of my eyes also This is something that can reveal itself in types of meditation (not looking at externals with the eyes) where there is an effect kinda like going down a gear (melting out levels of habitual consciousness) each time it happens. Experiment with this, sometimes it can activate the whole governor channel (MCO). I experience this lying in bed (safer than driving) hahaha!!❤❤ Also, Don Juan Matus talked about using the peripheral vision just to free oneself from habitual mental and sensual perspectives (I do this if I have to see a scary movie~ heehee!!). A different kind of exercise, but a not totally unrelated one he mentioned is to key your vision to the sight of object's shadows instead of the customary emphasis on distinguishing high-key light-source-reflecting surfaces over the whole of your field of view. The point here is to jog the habitual workings of the conscious mentality from its conformity with the Tonal (the rational psychological aparatus). I'm glad you brought this up, BD!!❤ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bearded Dragon Posted December 8, 2013 Ah, nice. It's interesting that you mentioned the MCO. I've been trying to work on that sort of stuff separately for martial arts with limited effect. I'll just also mention, for those who are interested, that looking from the back of the eyes doesn't feel the same as allowing yourself to look from the back of the eyes passively and without so much as a thought of trying to do it. Its the finger and the moon again. Just in case someone likes this idea and tries to replicate it I want to be clear that trying to replicate it won't get you anywhere as far as I'm concerned. Allowing your vision to relax and do its own thing without controlling it is what I'm talking about. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
deci belle Posted December 10, 2013 The relax part is crucial, BD, I agree!! I wanted to include a caution before, but let it go… any sustained pressure or focus of attention on any part of the body is extremely dangerous. I felt you had the right approach to avoid that kind of misuse of concentration, though!!❤ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
4bsolute Posted December 12, 2013 Seeing [...] How can it be any different deci? how can it be any different... Thank you. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
deci belle Posted December 12, 2013 Please PM me, 4bsolute, if you wish.❤ He may be referring to the opening line of this thread… Seeing is immediate knowledge bypassing the thinking/feeling self-reifying psychological apparatus. But, otherwise, it doesn't look any different (but yet it does). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Z3N Posted December 13, 2013 (edited) It is only looks different when you try to put a square in a round hole. Edited December 13, 2013 by Z3N Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dawei Posted December 14, 2013 Deci, So much of what your write about reminds me of the Zen story of the three-so-called stages of seeing/knowing/forgetting: 1. Before: Mountains are mountains 2. During: Mountains are not mountains 3. After: Mountains are mountains Sometimes I think that each of us are simply in a stage and maybe sometimes too aware of it. It may not matter if other stages are known or not, but the simple thought of the stage one is in may be enough cause of being in a stage-cage. And that may be why past monks requested to have these 'binds' undone; as the master asked, "what binds you?" It seems knowledge and knowing is passed off for seeing ; but we need to see beyond that; beyond a stage... and yet it is right in front of us... the Thusness you speak of... but I need your explanation. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
deci belle Posted December 14, 2013 (edited) Oh thank you, dawei!! A real thought, thoughtfully presented and actually about the topic and not the self-consciousness (or unconsciousness) of the poster. How wonderful! Yes, I believe that was Dogen— I ought to know, (and I do) but I'm just a bit too gun-shy around here after the past two days of dealing with creepy bums to just nail it. This is a thing that is so multi-leveled. My first post on this forum about five years ago was just this. It is titled Mountains. It can be wrapped up or released by the koan by Yunmen. "East mountain walks on water". It cannot be grasped. But that won't do either. Dogen's opening statement: Mountains and waters right now are the actualization of the ancient Buddha way. Each, abiding in its phenomenal expression,* realizes completeness. Because mountains and waters have been active since before the Empty Eon,* they are alive at this moment. Because they have been the self* since before form arose they are emancipation realization. Of course, the "stages" usage and the many other associations held in Dogen's sutra are essentially a fractal, this proclamation is most basic and pure. To say Mountains represent stillness, rest or stable sanity and the waters represent dynamic, chaotic action and danger is just sensing the iconic elements from a literalistic distance— and missing the brilliant stage set by Dogen's device. So when we first see this and hear this distance, it is due to separateness as characteristic of creation. This is neither reality nor unreality. Separateness is the idea. Knowing is an idea too. Creation is an idea in flux. To enter the realm of ideas without incurring karmic debt involves not entertaining the first thought. Ideas are to be dispensed with. So… In terms of entry, it is just not entertaining views of what is "mountain" and what is "water"…as it is what it is without distinguishing aspects relative to self. These just are, and mutual arising is "actualization". That the Buddha way is indicated, is characteristic of Reality itself. That buddhas are this function does not depend on Buddhism. This is just Suchness as is whether or not one sees. The dharma-eye is another name for the function of enlightened qualities which are Mind itself. It is what it is anyway as it is relative to the time. One simply does not choose to decide what the time is, as one finds out in the end (of the cycle). As seeing entails noting the arising of the first thought, One witnesses Change. Those who see the changes, are not carried along by Change. Those who only entertain the distance aspect throughout the creative cycle, never see that mountains are not mountains, and so never see "East mountain walks on water". This is "Mountains and waters right now are the actualization of the ancient Buddha way. Each, abiding in its phenomenal expression, realizes completeness." Completeness is neither still nor moving, "abiding in its phenomenal expression". Realizing this is "actualizing the ancient Buddha way" by seeing reality as is without being seduced by one's conditioned mentality. "Abiding in its phenomenal expression" as is, one is not moving. Completeness also neither being still is "the actualization of the ancient Buddha way". "Because mountains and waters have been active since before the Empty Eon, they are alive at this moment" is pointing to Causelessness. Why do enlightening beings take over creation and see changes to master times? Because they are alive at this moment. Life is "before the Empty Eon". Those who know the Empty Eon, know that there is no beginning, no reason or cause and no idea of entering creation in terms of the absolute. In terms of the created, this is just "because mountains and waters have been active". There is no precedence for going along with conditions. Creation's action is beginningless already, so to act on account of the causeless is to incur karma. This is the error of delusion imagining the separateness of stillness and movement. "Because they have been the self since before form arose they are emancipation realization" is nonoriginated being. Knowing this is being this in all times and places without beginning. This is not some other time and place. Emancipation realization is the self-same freedom of Buddha-nature, untrammeled by conditions because they are not different than the source of conditions "since before form arose". When I say knowledge, sometimes I mean the same as the knowledge of seeing— both the power of the dharma-eye and one's use of its insight to adapt impersonally in everyday ordinary situations. I sense your usage of the terms knowledge and knowing refer to conventional perception and that seeing is not really seeing unless it is by seeing through conditions as one who has no attachment nor self-reflective relationship with karmic evolution. I know you can simplify this long response in your own words effectively. I may have missed a point you were trying to make, so please let me know.❤ ed note: mispelled "stable" below quote; add 11th paragraph Edited December 14, 2013 by deci belle 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
deci belle Posted December 14, 2013 I tried to introduce the post above as a chronological or developmental flow in terms of a thought or the cycle of an energy event, not getting into the firing process thing. Even so, the inconceivable permeates the entire view. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brian Posted December 14, 2013 Deci, So much of what your write about reminds me of the Zen story of the three-so-called stages of seeing/knowing/forgetting: 1. Before: Mountains are mountains 2. During: Mountains are not mountains 3. After: Mountains are mountains Sometimes I think that each of us are simply in a stage and maybe sometimes too aware of it. It may not matter if other stages are known or not, but the simple thought of the stage one is in may be enough cause of being in a stage-cage. And that may be why past monks requested to have these 'binds' undone; as the master asked, "what binds you?" It seems knowledge and knowing is passed off for seeing ; but we need to see beyond that; beyond a stage... and yet it is right in front of us... the Thusness you speak of... but I need your explanation. I think I hear Donovan warming up in the background. Before he starts singing, let me say this: There is both an phenomenological and a noumenological component to this whole mountain/no-mountain/mountain thing, and the two are not tightly coupled but reflect & collimate each other, I think. The natural philosopher is presented with the opportunity to understand that the world we observe is not the way we observe it to be and, if after biting the quantum-apple assimilates this new understanding, is later presented with the opportunity to glimpse the physical realm in unfiltered light. For me, this phenomenological unveiling preceded my recent noumenological transition by about three decades. I am still playing peek-a-boo through the hanging-bead curtain of the latter at this point but the breadcrumbs from the former helps with telling the intellect to let go. I was mistaken! Right song, wrong musician: 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
deci belle Posted December 14, 2013 hahahahhaa!!❤❤ Brian, i though of saying last night (I stayed up waaay too late) that this thing requires a falling into, to activate its function in the phenomenal process which has no separate reality outside of noumenon. So, ya~ entry is really in just taking it up fully, by doing nothing, essentially— in terms of responding to the inevitable on occasion. As we do, the whole scene just opens up of its own accord. The critical thing is to avoid entertaining views as a strategy just to maintain the unified pivot of aware equipoise enabling clarity without bias or inclination. The wonderful thing is that our involvement, however circumstantial, isn't about us. But since creation doesn't know, we get the full brunt of the insanity. Or, maybe the insanity isn't any more or less, it just seems out of context with our interest in the outcome of any given situation, which is nonexistent. Not that we don't fight at critical junctures. Depending on the time, everything is appropriate. Even for me, after years of accepting the function, seeing essence and still letting go in the midst of situations for years afterward, it still took words just like these (Hongzhi's and then eventually Dogen's), to more accurately and deeply understand the function in terms of neither one nor the other nor both; so now it is somewhat easier in that I don't have to meld them together (noumenon+phenomenon). Either one or both constitute eternity. The writing I have done on stepping over eternity is in essence forgetting them both forever. It's just now. Oh yeah, when I first brought up this sutra years ago, mr M did get the musician right… but missed the song. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dawei Posted December 15, 2013 "Because mountains and waters have been active since before the Empty Eon, they are alive at this moment" is pointing to Causelessness. Why do enlightening beings take over creation and see changes to master times? Because they are alive at this moment. Life is "before the Empty Eon". Those who know the Empty Eon, know that there is no beginning, no reason or cause and no idea of entering creation in terms of the absolute. In terms of the created, this is just "because mountains and waters have been active". There is no precedence for going along with conditions. Creation's action is beginningless already, so to act on account of the causeless is to incur karma. This is the error of delusion imagining the separateness of stillness and movement. Life is before The Empty Eon... this playfulness with words by using words is what drew me to Zen reading many years ago and brings back a smile. "Because they have been the self since before form arose they are emancipation realization" is nonoriginated being. Knowing this is being this in all times and places without beginning. This is not some other time and place. Emancipation realization is the self-same freedom of Buddha-nature, untrammeled by conditions because they are not different than the source of conditions "since before form arose". When I say knowledge, sometimes I mean the same as the knowledge of seeing— both the power of the dharma-eye and one's use of its insight to adapt impersonally in everyday ordinary situations. I sense your usage of the terms knowledge and knowing refer to conventional perception and that seeing is not really seeing unless it is by seeing through conditions as one who has no attachment nor self-reflective relationship with karmic evolution. Yes. Seems 'knowledge' goes through its own stages of understanding. thanks. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
deci belle Posted December 16, 2013 (edited) I got this from the Mountain thread with your comment, dawei… deci belle, on 25 Oct 2013 - 21:01, said: "Real practice is a force passing through stillness and movement without accruing any distinctions between self, other, time(s) and location(s), in order to spontaneously maneuver through delusion while functioning naturally in its phenomena by adapting to evolving situations." dawei said: This seems the essence of 'seeing'... is it mountains (physically or not) or mountains walking (actually or not).... it is about what we are seeing (or not); and that is not eyes but all our associations via actualizations. It is the whole situation; one's whole practice of endless transformations. Openly, sincerely not-knowing is the essence of stillness transporting selfless adaption. I could say it is mountains are manifestly changing over water's unfathomable depths of causeless support. But I don't like that at all. Not-knowing is seeing yet not saying. Not discriminating, not defining, not limiting oneself to mundane considerations while entering into situations. Vulnerability is a matter of social contract, societal mores, one's relationship with people and the entire world, yet one is always ready to detach in the midst of the hubbub according to the situation itself. Reality is a constant on-off alternating current (or not). Enlightening function is no different, yet it seems to rectify the energy to a non-fluctuating energy of direct current (please, bob, please spare us your 2¢). This is a way to look at what it means to not go along with changes or not follow creation unawares. So detachment isn't breaking away~ it's just not going along. So detachment is not abandonment of others or oneself. Detachment is the expression of the impersonal nature of being; of knowing unreality and therefore not being carried along by karmic bonds unawares. One must be fully integrated in karmic evolution to absorb potential, which is the means of transcending Change. So as 4bsolute says, "How can it look any different?" is saying it doesn't look any different, yet here one does not follow appearances with the mind even though one adapts to the requirements of a natural response to the situation's timing. Not knowing is the grease allowing continued involvement in naturally unreal evolution (karma). In terms of "leading on", this could be construed as identifying with outcomes, yet since one does not attach to desire, form or formlessness, one just absorbs potential. There is only seeing East Mountain walk on water. ed note: fixed spacing under dawei's quote Edited December 16, 2013 by deci belle 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Clarity Posted December 18, 2013 So not knowing is really knowing without knowing. And just this is seeing! 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
deci belle Posted December 18, 2013 (edited) i wanna sm00chez-vous!!❤❤ Aware and awake without dwelling or sticking (following) the phenomenal content of mind is unminding in the face of phenomena. This is seeing through phenomena without denying characteristics. Unminding is equanimity. This is why reality looks the same as delusion. There is no other mind. Unminding is not to be taken to mean everybody is happy (or should be), or lovey-dovey-nesses in flowing robes on Maui is the way it is supposed to be. Both 3bob and 4bsolute actually tried to trap me with that kind of shit this week. You can't kill a buddha that way!! When you kill a buddha, the buddha doesn't know either. KILLING A BUDDHA IS JUST YOU KILLING YOUR OWN IDEA OF SELF, OTHER, GOOD, BAD, BEFORE,AFTER. It is just now. It has never been other than just this. Now is the incipience of inconceivability. Just jump in and forget yourself for an instant— for all time. When you get here, there is no buddha in the three kalpas who can touch you. It just means seeing reality as is, killing buddhas on sight, killing ignoramuses the same way with blazing independence. So not-knowing is not using the mind to follow creation. This is "turning the light around to shine back on its source". The source is selflessness already. It doesn't take any time to reach reality. When the light is turned around by not-knowing in the midst of ordinary affairs, this is itself the immediate Unborn Dharma-eye of enlightening beings, the efflorescence of the Golden Flower of the light of awareness. There is nothing else to it. ed note: spice it up a bit Edited December 18, 2013 by deci belle 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dawei Posted December 21, 2013 I got this from the Mountain thread with your comment, dawei… "Real practice is a force passing through stillness and movement without accruing any distinctions between self, other, time(s) and location(s), in order to spontaneously maneuver through delusion while functioning naturally in its phenomena by adapting to evolving situations." Dogen's Mountain and River Sutra has confirmed what I long thought, and as you said here and is but a cross-stitch pattern of your posts; The dissolution of self is a delusion of distinctions. Each of the 10,000 functions naturally in its phenomena by adapting... One must be fully integrated in karmic evolution to absorb potential, which is the means of transcending Change. But I need to understand this more... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
deci belle Posted December 24, 2013 (edited) hi dawei~ I've been to (what the cat said)… but I'll quote a few words from Hongzhi to start… Since one has the function from the start within the light, arbitrarily seeking to keep this light protected from the conditional, one instead creates isolation in the midst of unity, and one is then no different than those protecting circumstantial identities within the temporal. That others have no mind for the inconceivable, doesn't limit their culpability within it as the inconceivable isn't different than karma. Only one's ability to see through phenomena is turning the light around. Seeing through phenomena is turning the light around since you are now not following the identity of the conditional, only dealing with the ramifications. Since the light is itself the identity of reality, your awareness of the light is the identity of selflessness: this is enlightening being. Whereas ordinary worldlings only see their own personalistic identities relative to creation and are therefore bound within the rounds of creation. The light is the same in any case, so there is no reason to avoid the conditional or act like you are somehow different than creation. Why? Not in order to absorb potential as it is only a way to talk about what is natural for those functioning in terms of enlightening being— all people have this mind already. That is why. That's why I say if you then seek to keep enlightenment from the polluted realm of ordinary situations or see yourself as different than deluded ignoramuses, it is unreality. The only difference between worldlings and enlightening beings in terms of authentic openness and sincere humanity, is that one is seeing through the totality of affairs from the start and the other is caught up in the illusion from the start. Reality is the same~ the difference is in terms of seeing it as it is without bias or inclination. So one just accepts (and thus discovers) one's function in the midst of ordinary affairs. This is using the temporal to purify the real. There is no other way to live effectively and fearlessly other than by true vulnerability. True vulnerability is truly able to absorb potential since energy is involved. If you act on the form of energy in terms of desire, fear or are otherwise unconscious of the karmic cycle you are embedded in, then energy is transformed into the phenomena of going along with changes. If by seeing reality and having no intent invested in ramifications relative to personalistic views of self and other, and are able to subtly stand aside by observing Change, then the potential of immaterial energy is absorbed and stored to constitute the unrefined elixir, instead of changing into cloying momentum of circumstantial energy. Accepting the conditional without conditions and having no mind for considerations of outcomes based on a speculative relationship with phenomena while dealing with the situation on its terms is being the guest. Going along with creation without activating the deliberating mind habituated to private interests in affars IS absorbing potential. Since one has not done anything with one's own allotment of karmic potential embedded within the situation itself, energy reverts to its essence. So one must be fully integrated in karmic evolution to absorb the immaterial real potential energy of essence. While others go along with changes, enlightening beings unite with the essence of Change itself. This is potential. So one either goes along with changes unawares or one absorbs the essence of Change. The energy is the same. Becoming transcendence is a matter of having the same function from the start. Every new cycle is a new opportunity to practice the firing process from start to finish. In the I-Ching this is called having a start, but no finish, since each cycle in terms of enlightening being is already returning to the source of beginningless unity— which is just another name for this immaterial essential potential energy observed secretly by real people in the course of ordinary affairs. This whole preface is referring to what I had in mind from the start, that is, Hongzhi's statement thus: "The eye that engages the fluctuations and the body that voyages over the world are empty and spirited, still and illuminating, and appear extraordinary among the ten thousand forms. They cannot be buried in the earth's dust and cannot be bundled in the cocoon of past conditioning. The moon traverses the sky, the clouds depart the valley, reflecting without mind, operating without self, becoming radiant and benevolent. This is how everything is perfect, cast off fully and functioning freely. This is called the body emerging from inside the gate." Here I say that although one has the benefit of wisdom and some discipline of tradition, unless one is utterly vulnerable to conditions themselves, and is able to function freely in terms of those conditions, one's skill is not yet perfected. ed note: add last paragraph Edited December 24, 2013 by deci belle 4 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dawei Posted December 24, 2013 So one must be fully integrated in karmic evolution to absorb the immaterial real potential energy of essence. While others go along with changes, enlightening beings unite with the essence of Change itself. This is potential. So one either goes along with changes unawares or one absorbs the essence of Change. The energy is the same. I could of quoted every paragraph with a comment but this brings it all together for me. Sameness is not sameness and yet is sameness. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
deci belle Posted December 24, 2013 Buddhists say sameness within difference to express the utterly subsumed quality of reality in terms of itself as is (Suchness), as well as enlightening activity adapting to conditions and also the conditions under which subtle operation is properly observed. Sameness is in terms of situationally evolving realms' outcomes being ultimately moot (as its essence is Unity), but there is its difference in that while adherence to cyclical processes is relative to the individual, yet enlightening beings never reach an end. The world is itself a phantom realm, filled with phantom people, so true reality is found in terms of return to the world's nonoriginated foundation of incipience flowing in perpetuity. There is nothing to grasp.❤ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
deci belle Posted December 25, 2013 (edited) So by not grasping being the perennial mode of operation in the midst of ordinary affairs, the world's nonoriginated foundation of incipience flowing in perpetuity comes to the fore by virtue of situations themselves, and it couldn't be more natural because reality is complete as is. Even as the world beckons…❤ Though the world chooses you with showers of flowers, their fragrance is the same from the branch. So though you see the source of fragrance through its root, still you adapt to conditional showers of flowers, only without grasping ramifications— because their incipience is presence itself, not admitting following. Though the scene is phenomenal, only you see it unmoving. Unnoticed, you neither rush or tarry …a passing through in endless transformations coeval with creation, not subject to creation. By maintaining equipoise at the aperture of Change, the gate and door of the mysterious female, you see changes by an inner stillness of impersonal witnessing. In this state of openness and sincere observation, who would dare to grasp at illusion? Clarity said: So not knowing is really knowing without knowing. And just this is seeing! Yes, indeed. True knowledge is knowledge of incipience. This is seeing without traces. Grasping is the knowledge of knowing endless ramifications. ed note: add bit starting with Clarity's quote Edited December 25, 2013 by deci belle Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Urpflanze Posted December 25, 2013 Can we "see" without a context and without the ability to abstract? Is not "seeing" the achieving of an operational level of transparency within a context? Does that not make "seeing" subjective? Can we ever "see through" any thing - achieve an absolute objective transparency in all its contexts? And suppose we do achieve this ability to "see through", what will then there be left to "see"? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites