deci belle

The classics have been saying the same thing for thousands and thousands of years, Perceiver. What's so hard about it? And who is trying so hard to sound discerning of what is not enlightenment with the perspective of ignorance, hmmm? Should you wish to address the OP, you will find that it is people like you who cannot leave me out of the discussion. ed note: add Perceiver's name

http://lezboyenne.tumblr.com/image/96039381013 Who is the friend who has no ears to hear? ed note: add a new picture of deci's Rockabilly rig!!

Yum!!❤︎

Perciever, mr Gold's penchant for insincere leading questions hasn't changed since he came on board. The reason for his tarbaby questioning is obvious to me. I just crammed it back where it came from. BTW, your comment is totally off-topic. Brian said: The key phrase is "somewhere deep inside". Brian didn't flip the switch. The switch just switched. That's how seeing is. No one can take credit for that. And that's precisely who can be credited for recognition of reality, i.e.: nobody. The true human being with no status is who knows reality. Why? Because the real is what recognizes reality. Real human being is every bit a function of inherent nonpsychological wisdom as is ego the function of the conditioned psychological apparatus of the being who is going to die. Neither real human being nor the false psychological consciousness has an attributable self-identity. Awareness is itself one's identity. Since awareness is selfless, conditioned identities are temporary phantasmic phenomena. Most people never conceive of arriving at the basis of true identity, inconceivable, blazing in your skull before your parents were born. Your own mind is it. The Unborn is itself the means to read these words. There is no other mind. What is it? ed note: change reference to Goldisheavy to "mr Gold" per Moderator's directive

Mind is one, unborn. Therefore there is no am, not because of an absence of a relativistic notion pertaining to nonexistence of "other", but because no thing is the rule. In fact, the quality of otherness of the homeland of nothing whatsoever is a device of taoist alchemic process. Recognition of reality being flesh and blood entry into the inconceivable mystery of reality is this very no thing being the essence of creation and its evolution in terms of time. The world is you. As such, there is no separate nature to act on. There are no two sides of the same coin. The mystery is whole, undifferentiated. Seeing reality is not apart from delusion; authentic permanent experience of the real is by virtue of delusion's evolution. Seeing delusion as delusion is reality. Seeing delusion as reality is delusion. Stepping off the cliff and accepting one's function, who would dare to act on one's own behalf? Selfless adaption to everyday ordinary situations is matching one's potential to creation, therefore one's actions do not admit of one's own power. This is enlightening activity. It's a mystery. Effective cultivation of the empty field is deep plowing through unified sameness void of ideas of self and other. Difference is undeniable, sameness is relative to other, not the self. The way depends on other, adaption is up to the self. There is no fixed pattern. Seeing reality as is, the worldly dream partakes of true reality because we personally bring the power to the fore by our own impersonal adaptivity. We come to radiate the virtue of enlightening qualities because gradual refinement of the human mentality becomes the abode of the tao. The expression of the power of tao is its virtue, people's inherent enlightening being.

Walk a mile in my flip-flops, dear~ you obviously have not done much research into the lives of prior illuminates have you. No matter… Just make sure you walk every step you take in YOUR shoes, and don't worry about others, hmmm? Nothing is gained by complete perfect enlightenment. One of the early Chan patriarchs was poisoned six times over the course of his tenure. He died by poisoning, by the way. Just forget your ideas about how enlightening being should be. By the time beginners have ears for anyone worthy of note, of course they are only going to be perceptive to the tip of the proverbial iceberg, and the teacher's hagiography has been fluffed and buffed like a movie star for at least a thousand years by that time. Like I said, enlightenment isn't a thing beyond you. IT IS YOU. Why haven't you seen your nature? Don't waste time thinking about what enlightened people should be like. Use the same delusional phenomena I do to refine yourself. It's all there is to work with. Are you so friendly with every asshole you meet? Who is it that thinks someone doesn't act enlightened? You would do well to find out who that is and then we can see how you do in the same circumstances while you are then able to be knowing full well that no one is not this same enlightened mind. Should I not also wear 5" stilettos and a $500 bra just because I'm enlightened? I hope at least that you have the sense to crank one of a number of 50 to 100 watt amps to meltdown distortion more often than you bathe— as I do.❤︎ ed note: spell "bathe" correctly.

Absolutely, Phenom~ at the highest levels of subtle practice, Chan buddhism and Complete Reality taoism are identical. It's not so much a method of stability other than using essence itself to see reality divorced of self-reifying patterns. Stability is the nature of open awareness itself. If one can give the psychological neurosis dependent on externals the ghost and make the subtle shift to open wonder, stability is inherent. In working with essence directly, conditioned patterns are bypassed by activation of nonpsychological awareness. The human mentality can then learn by example that it is unnecessary in the process. It is actually a very compassionate and civil manner of conscious evolution for those whose sensitivities have no need for dramas paying obeisance to the demiurge. The demiurge amounts to a bellhop in the final analysis. Give his bald head a kiss on your way through~ he'll blush.❤︎ ed note: add 2nd paragraph

These are the kids, really, and others whose aspirations never evolve beyond the need to belong to an adolescent field of desire to be hip. Many cannot sustain this charade for long, either for reasons of responsibility, health or conscious evolution. It is a cultural veneer fed by manufacturers and advertising— not that the technology isn't a total wash, and not that it can be stopped. But not all people growing up or even grown up nowadays are media-victims. Those who cannot stop texting are the same ones who would have been likewise unaware of or helpless before their own internal dialogue in bygone eras. The general percentage of people ready to aspire to reality probably has never been above .05% at any time in human history. The reference to the chapter in the Laotzu is applicable to conscious self-refinement in that if one is ready for diminishing or augmenting an element of character, and one is conscious of the timing involved, then allowing for or mitigating influential elements can precipitate a shift opposed to the incipiently anticipated trend. It is absolutely a matter of knowledge of self, others, the physical and/or psychological terrain. Don't we indulge the men who would take the bait, and drop the ones who do? Same thing. It works on us. Think of the bowl of money traditionally made available to monks in case they need to visit the local brothel. Want another example? How about stocking up on ice cream as if you are going to indulge when you've noticed you have been indulging. Seems counterintuitive, but its manipulability is evident in behavioral, political and military sciences. Why? It's characteristic of conditioning, and no one knows why. I'm not talking about those who are craving a binge and stocking up for a bender, mind you. I'm referring to those who are in the position to manipulate and maneuver consciously with the personal power of unbending intent. It's not a matter of moving against. It's manipulating a manifestation of change deliberately. There is an ancient school attributed to an esoteric branch of taoism, or that enjoys a veneer of taoist application called the School of Letting All Hell Break Loose. Same idea.

This topic is thought AFTER enlightenment, OK? "This Dharma is not something that thought and discrimination can understand." Having abandoned one's habitual dependence on the human psychological apparatus to discern the worldly, one naturally begins to enter the ocean of reality. Eventually one may develop the freedom to effectively employ this device or let it rest, at will. Can one ever be certain? "If you're determined to take up this great affair, I ask you to boldly apply your spirit, and make a clean break with this, the root of birth and death and delusion, which comes as the vanguard and leaves as the rearguard: this is the time to appear. At just such a time, you can finally use the verbal meanings and mental thoughts to effect. "Why? Because once the Storehouse Consciousness has been cleared away, then birth and death and delusion have no place to stay. When birth and death and delusion have no home, then thinking and discrimination themselves are nothing but transcendent wisdom and subtle knowledge: there's not the slightest thing further to obstruct you." This is AFTER enlightenment. Until one begins the gradual effort of entry into the inconceivable by shedding the habitual reliance on intellectual views and finally sees one's essential nature, how can one be certain? So P'an Shan's saying, "A complete mind is buddha; a complete buddha is human…" ed note: the quotes are from Ta Hui's letter to Hsieh K'uo-jan, in J.C. Cleary's translation of Swampland Flowers. ISBN 978-1-590-30-318-4 There is a reason why my posts and threads aren't really up for discussion, other than in a private setting. Hopefully this can be discerned effectively by those habituated to intellectualism until they themselves realize the need to drop various ignorant conceits and take up this great affair.

It's not really that realization upon realization is necessarily cued on the absolute~ it's just that essence is not to be differentiated in terms of the whole. Delusion being termed the false is not to be denied. It is by virtue of the false that we see the true. In seeing the true as it is inherently consisting of the false, seeing is the release of the karmic matrix, freeing potential from the bonds of creative evolution. This is enlightening being in the midst of polluted existence, naturally so.

Nestentrie, why not wait until it is fine? Even so, flight requires space. Space is one whole. I see you didn't waver too much. As for grappling with whatness to master where, we can cover it pretty much in terms of what we will, and that is, we don't. Grappling is not possible outside of not going along with possibilities we imagine to be. True effort is in the dissolution of mental habit; grinding down the patterns of perception and response relative to the person who is going to die. All is revealed, where it is, as it is, naturally, according to the time, without any effort on our part. Yes, doing leaves a trail of undoneness, and that is why action relative to the person is delusion. Just avoid it altogether. Not-doing without coming or going according to the situation and the time is selfless adaption. Ordinary affairs are neither easy nor difficult. What else is there besides inevitability perpetually the singular presence resting incipiently in terms of the very pivot of awareness active yet not dwelling on circumstances? Being is knowledge; doing is folly— even enlightening activity. Impersonal adaption is selfless in more ways than one, but it is so principally in terms of spontaneous response without admitting one's own power made possible by no attachment to outcomes. In fact, outcomes is a concept relative to the person used to describe reality. Outcomes actually do not exist as such in terms of enlightening being because enlightening activity is not relative to the person. Mainly, it is just a matter of equanimity of perpetual total acceptance whether it be, grand, common, or unconventional. Ultimately these distinctions are moot ramifications swirling in the eye of inconceivability. Nobody knows. We do not make choice one over another an occupation of cultivation, we just observe the inner and outer terrain, adjusting the inner to meet the outer on its terms to maintain equipoise relative to conditions as they evolve. Your above post is a very rough draft, yes~ muuuuch too mechanical, but it has a point. This is not too creative (that's a good thing), but there is a rootedness in the psychological. Let the psychological underpinnings dissolve and let the uncreated settle out without attempting to make arrangements. There is simply nothing to know in terms of evolution. Just let it all go, noted as it appears without following it. This is a temporary expedient which whittles down attachment to outcomes. Eventually, after a long time, the relative aspect has no person; attributability is not beyond space. Ego is not the eye, nor its sensibility: time is its consideration, therefore it waits. I would say that achievement is only relative to the situation as any potential is inherent in the situation itself~ even if that be the situation of a lifetime. The identity of the self is awareness, which is empty, uncreated, immaterially open energy, inconceivably nonbeing being all at once. Enlightening activity is naturally its expression, therefore nothing is ever achieved. Transcendence is seeing the extraordinary by virtue of the ordinary without needing to do anything because complete reality is already presence, immaterial, no different than your own awareness as is, in terms of the situation. The extraordinary has no differentiating quality. Potential is the essence of the ordinary. I say seeing this is absorbing it, but that is only a way to describe that inconceivable aware nature is inherent in ordinary circumstances, not dependent on self and other. In seeing reality, we do not go along with created cycles because there are none. Transcendence in this regard is just letting the dross of creation be while unconsciously expressing the unity of the essentially real by adapting to conditions as they occur without any attachment. nestentrie wrote: This is partially true, because this is clinging to one side in terms of describing nonbeing. Since we must come to terms with the Middle Way to see complete reality, therefore Suchness, nonbeing within being, ordinariness is extraordinary and extraordinary is ordinary too. Why? Reality looks the same whether one is deluded or not. As for being deluded, Dogen said, "Further, there are people who attain realization upon realization and people who are deluded within delusion." He also said, "Those who have great realization about delusion are buddhas. Those who are greatly deluded within realization are sentient beings." When the traces of enlightenment come to an end, and this traceless enlightenment is continued endlessly in subtle adaption to situations, one can finally become a person deluded within delusion. Realization upon realization is the same as clinging to one side. This is the traces of enlightenment to be forgotten. Then we can consider the possibility of finally coming around to really express non-differentiation from within delusion itself: mind activated without dwelling on anything.

This is not a matter of sudden enlightenment. Clearing away the storehouse consciousness is just resting in the Unborn. It's just smiling in open awareness with no thoughts in thoughts. No thoughts in thoughts is presence unmoving in the midst of ordinary affairs. Why? How could anything come to pass when nothing has ever come to pass? Inevitability is assured. Acting according to circumstances is adapting impersonally. One just passes through events normally, in full knowledge of the inevitability of outcomes without attaching to them. Nobody knows, so going along without knowing is simply how it is. Others may assume views based on attachment to outcomes, but they really are totally unnecessary in terms of reality. This is not the same as not knowing in terms of hope, in terms of striving, in terms of right and wrong. The Unborn open aware countenance, present and unified, is just the function of inherent enlightening being, no different than you own mind right now. Of course, I was very devious in calling this thread "Thought after Enlightenment". How could I call it Thought before Delusion"? But these two phrases mean the same thing, after all. Unborn mind is neither enlightenment nor delusion. Why? Because presence of awakened Mind is not created and is equal to reality. Seeing through phenomena without denying characteristics is recognizing reality as is. Just smiling in the face of creative evolution without attachment to outcomes entertaining views of before and after is the Virtue of Nonresistance in the midst of resistance. Subtle adaption being the Supreme Vehicle is saying the same thing. Thoughts continuing in the aftermath of sudden enlightenment are no different than beforehand. Why? Because nothing is gained by complete perfect realization. This just means mind is inherently enlightened. No one has a mind other than this unified open aware nature. Just smile in the face of creative evolution without feeling there is a person attached to outcomes in the breath, not knowing whose breath after all… what is it?

In Complete Reality terminology, the shining mind is the basis of stable awareness, not the conscious awareness momentarily empty of its habitual contents that beginners often mistake for the shining mind. In terms of meditation, the shining mind is insight, brought to the fore by subtle concentration in the midst of ordinary circumstances. The shining mind is open awareness, nonpsychological immediate knowledge of reality as is. Recognizing reality is wordless insight into actualities as they are without notions of existential personality considerations. This is bypassing thought differentiating psychological ramifications and outcomes relative to self and other. The scattered mind is its reference point in the ancient Complete Reality glossaries representing the roving human mentality. The human mentality becomes the shining mind when it forgets its reifying mental patterns.

His way is obstructed. He must learn to persevere alone.

Does this mean I won't have to see your stupid quotes attributed to me sprayed around the web anymore? hahahhahahahhahahahhahahahhahahhahahhahahahhahaa!! You would be better served by sitting on a pole in a hole without a goal to suit your soul while you eat coal on a stale roll.❤︎

What a wonderful comment, Wu Ming Jen!!❤︎ The shining mind is empty of the human mentality. The human mentality is thoughts relative to the personality. When thoughts relative to the personality are in their rightful place, the function of ego consciousness is a tool. ed note: add ed note~ hahahhahahhahhaa!! I get cut out of my own thread!! hhahhahahhahahh!!

Haven't we given bob more attention than he deserves? This is the OP. The recognition of reality as the totality of one's self is abiding in the presence of an immediate and perpetual result without cause as is. This is not dependent on circumstances, it is proven by them. Simply believing this is not good enough. Proving it in actual affairs is clarifying the basis of potential in terms of each created cycle. If one accomplishes anything, it is not real. Passing through, things are as they are without making arrangements. This is because the basis is inherent in creation. In not going along, good and bad cease to exist. The proof is arriving at the result of inevitability over and over and over. When you find out what happened in the end, yin and yang have yet to act. This is sameness, neither lasting nor destroyed. It seems silly to mention this, but I still don't know. ed note: add the OP

Mind is not subject to your thoughts, bob. You actually don't know anything at all pertaining to your speculations. And that's what your attachment to rules will get you. You actually do not have an affinity with Virtue sufficient to see the error of your insistence in your personalistic views based on something much less than an impersonal sincere open intent that has the power to facilitate a change in your ability to effect a revolution in your habitual consciousness. No one owes you the time of day based on your present ability to insist on a view based on ignorance— nobody owes me anything based on my realization and expression of the effective application of spiritual subtle operation independent of convention. I suggest you rise to the occasion of aspiration to the rules I abide by and screw the weak usage of convention you are presently couch-surfing to maintain a habitual presence in the world.

Ok, Infinity~ The term cultivation is a device to be employed when effective. Not-doing is basically cultivation from the start. Virtuous attention is open sincere intent, impersonal, with no object. 360˚ focusless focus. The ego dropping off is realization of essential nature. Ego-consciousness, the human mentality, is a necessary function, not the identity of the self. Seeing one's nature is recognizing the basis. When the function of conditioned conscious awareness is recognized for what it is, and is utilized according to its proper capacity, the functional basis of one's inherent enlightening being is free to adapt to situations automatically. I appreciate your struggle to articulate this subject. It takes a long time to work it out.❤︎

An ancient worthy said, " Just comprehend nothingness in the midst of things, unconcern amidst concerns: when seeing forms and hearing sounds, don't act blind and deaf." Another ancient worthy said, "Fools remove objects but don't obliterate mind; the wise wipe out mind without removing objects." "Gentlemen of affairs are quick to want to understand Chan. They think a lot about the scriptural teachings and the sayings of the ancestral teachers, wanting to be able to explain clearly [to satisfy their delusional proclivities]. They are far from knowing that his clarity is nonetheless an unclear matter. "…I teach gentlemen of affairs to let go and make themselves dull…" Yet they manage to go on and on (especially the dull ones) to glow all the brighter with utterly off-topic philosophical observations. That is a wonderful link, dawei.❤︎ ed note: add last line. The first two paragraphs are from Ta Hui's letters in Swampland Flowers, translated by J.C. Cleary.

All the traditions of mental hygiene necessitate years of serious single-minded study before even entering into supervised meditation practice. Only after this kind of penetration into the nature of mind is it possible to talk about the problems encountered and the practice of self-refinement as it applies to clarifying the human mentality. I never had the opportunity to ask or tell anybody anything ever. Please don't show up unprepared to my threads unless you plan to do a lot of reading and referencing without feeling it is necessary to post. It really isn't fair to those who post only after considerable reflection beforehand. It is hopefully obvious that the old-timers are extremely guilty of this and probably won't ever do what is necessary to change their habits in this regard. The requirements are no different for beginners than they are for those set in their ways: one must WANT to change in order to manifest the world-honored result. The reason it is not good enough to believe is because there is nothing to believe. Though reality is the scene before one's eyes, it does not involve the sense-gates.

I really don't follow you, Infinity. Reality, consciousness, mind, ideas, circumstances, cultivation as conscious action, identifying with mind… etc. Reality is mind, even as delusion— you make it that way— that's thoughts. There is a wealth of information in the classics. They are very helpful if studied. It takes years to develop a usable vocabulary that can be used to discuss the reality behind the terms. It is best to concentrate on one or another of the authentic traditions that one may have an affinity with. It really is a necessary part of the gradual approach and I recommend it highly. What you are calling mind as the believing, questioning, self-reifying consciousness is delusion, conscious awareness. It would be safer and clearer to refer to this thieving ego-identified human mentality as something other than mind (unless you attach qualifications). Identifying with the mind that identifies itself is getting into schizophrenia. It is enough that the human mentality is the false identity and leave it at that, ok? Also, mind being in consciousness is beyond redundancy because, as before, in terms of multiple personalities, it is best to steer clear of psychological distinctions altogther— the point is to discover and abide in the nonpsychological, which is spiritual, impersonal and immediately aware, without entering into the human mentality in the first place. Human conditioned conscious psychological awareness is simply polluted. Clear this completely and it is the mind of Tao. There are no two minds. Identification is the conditioned activity of the human mentality. That is what it does. Conscious activity is verrrry rarely even necessary in the course of impersonal adaption to circumstances. Study more, observe the human mentality without following its action unawares and think less.❤︎

Nothing is negated. Seeing through phenomena without denying characteristics is the Supreme Vehicle. The 10k things aren't one thing: essence isn't a thing. Essence is inherent in creation. Enlightening being simply isn't separate and essence isn't created. Nothing is it, not things. As I said to you before: stop making sense, ok? You really ought to spend time studying the ancients and then reflecting on reality as you use situations to refine yourself instead of speculating on the meaning of words. Enough backing up, just stop! Drop negation and nihilism and any kind of relative idea pertaining to emptiness you can think of. It's not it. It is not ideas. This matter is not within the realm of mental activity. Situations are not different than oneself. That is all there is to it. It is not a matter of things being. Since oneself is essential nature, uncreated, and things are not different, the nature of reality is empty. Adapting impersonally to situations is matching one's potential to creation. I'm talking about enlightening activity. Not treating things as things but as potential is returning things to essence. Recognizing reality is just this. Seeing the light of potential in all things is using the world to refine the self. Refining the self is enlightening activity. It's all the same as one gathers Virtue and as the Way coalesces, one ceases cloying involvements. As situations come up, one just responds without personalistic interpretations coming to mind. This is recognizing reality.

Valmont, this lightweight is not worth the trouble. Though not unlike a horse-fly. But you sure have weighed in, Vicompte!❤︎ ed note: talk nicer about the Foolsgold

We create without seeing reality. i.e.: "with thought we create", as you said. Afterwards, we do not create. Why? Creation is karmic. Enlightening being is adapting without entering creation. This is the meaning of freedom from karmic evolution. Enlightenment is the identity of mind uncreated. This is our nature. Awareness has never moved. We don't get to our source, we see it is as is, and this seeing is Sameness, being no different than reality. We are beyond creation. Why would such an enlightened person stoop to catch intention arising out of nothingness and translate it into a thing? That is the working definition of the thieving consciousness of delusion— and a very good description by you too! We do not translate intention into thought out of nothingness unless it is unawares. You are taking an awful lot of credit by saying "From nothingness arises an intention, a very subtle vibration, which is then consciously translated into a thought." Immediate knowledge is not thinking; before the first thought, there is no translation necessary. What about that? Your post is a cut above the others, by the way, 4bsolute.❤︎