deci belle

Telepathy is not a big deal. Enlightenment is not an idea.

Setting the Standard Rising above one's ingrained sarcasm, indifference, apathy, intellectual conceits, self-satisfaction, guilt-trips and attitudes attributable to a lifetime's accretions of learned and inherited ignorance is accomplished by setting the standard by which to wrap up one's personal history for all time. Just set the standard above the selfish reifications based on your limited view of your own life's perceived experiences and motivations. It isn't a matter of condescension or condemning one's personal indemnities in order to punish or surpass them somehow. In transcending ego, there is no value judgement employed~ one simply arrives at a point of forgetting the self's identity altogether by a process of refusing to entertain self-reflecting notions of thought and feeling at a subtle level of unbroken concentration over a very long time. What happens is, the intellectual, rational self-reifying function eventually craps out on its own— one doesn't wait for this to happen. It's like wearing out a shoe. The world provides the means naturally …one just drops the habits conditionally employed to groom the personality's self-sustaining apparatus in the process of dealing with everyday ordinary situations. One day you just …forget to remember. "Empty the mind and fill the belly." The achievement of enlightening experience is none other than an instance of having forgotten your lifetime up to that point which has the result of severing the root of compulsive action. The compulsion to act is the tap-root of karmic existential identity from time immemorial and beyond. Having the will to sustain a subtle consistency of psychological clarity and stillness over a long period of time arrives at the world-honored result. One spontaneous burst of velocity cultivated by virtue of the unbending extreme limit held in a love so hopeless, death so open, sincerity so world-shattering in vision that a selfless movement extending beyond the binds and bounds of conditioned awareness altogether is witnessed. Therein, after a long time of self-refinement induced by sustained psychological and intellectual fasting in the course of assessing objectively and responding impersonally to ordinary situations, one simply forgets to bring one's conditioned personal identity along for the ride. And in that instant, one leaves it for all time. In the moment of having forgotten one's facetious identity, one's lifetime of personal histories— what is left is what had been aglow all along. Here one discovers the great matter of birth and death once and for all. Experiencing death, one discovers life in the heart of non-being on the verge of action in perpetuity. This is the limit of the limitless, not a concept. It is another universe. There is no thing. Selfless open aware potential suffusion in readiness forever …a quickened energy hovering in stillness above the primal organization and its sprouts of cyclic existential process. There is no knowledge. Unborn selfless non-being awake, aware, miraculously aware. In rising above habitual selfish views of one's ingrained sarcasm, indifference, apathy, intellectual conceits, self-satisfaction, guilt-trips and attitudes, one makes enlightenment the standard to die by. ed note: change "reifications you base" to "reifications based" in the 2nd paragraph.

haha!! poofs can be like that~ thank you, Spotless!!❤︎ Ya, the situational habit energy just poofs. One knows another cycle has come and gone in the same way. In seeing through phenomena mindfully (consciously when one has less power), or as one is seeing reality face to face with the characteristics of creative energy, one simply senses passing through… and there is nothing to show for conditioning's momentum. In this instance some may notice that something happened. Those who do not know Change, know changes. Otherwise… sameness is proven in actual events, over and over and over. One does not "move on" oneself. Creation is absorbed in terms of one's potential. This is stealing potential and taking over creation. Through endless transformations of created cycles, self sublimated physically and spiritually, Complete Reality is not different… and there is nothing one can say. ed note: italicize le poofs

When studying worldy things, one relies totally on verbal meanings and mental thoughts. But if you use verbal meanings and thoughts to study the world-transcending Dharma, you are way off. Didn't Buddha say so? —"This Dharma is not something that thought and discrimination can understand." In order to mitigate the repercussions of necessary admonishment, recreational philosophers should consider this when venturing out of their element…❤︎

It's not asking or not. Leave that fcuking mind out of it, people! It's already itself your own face growing its own pointed nose. "If you always forget concerns and keep the mind still without smashing the mind of birth and death, then the delusive influences of form, sensation, perception, (questions), volition and consciousness will get their way, and you'll inevitably be dividing emptiness in two." Dividing emptiness in two… sound familiar? Emptiness is not remotely nihilism even if you leave it's dualistic partner eternalism out of the script to be literally fashionable.

Now THAT's a mystery!! As for Forgetting to Remember… ya gotta listen to a LOT of Country music to pull that off~ easier said than done for some!! heeheehee!! ed note: add 2nd line

poof!

Only those acting from the singularity of nonbeing don't still think they're here. Why? Because "here" is created. "There" is the other side for those who do not know their nature. Neither here nor there is people awakened to empty presence. I wonder why it is that the free-thinkers never dare discuss this? It is because they do not have the perspective of the uncreated. It's not that there is no "here" to speak of, it is that everyday ordinary complete reality isn't knowledge relative to ideas. So at the thought of emptiness, clever minds don't randomly speculate that there is another kind of emptiness that is better or worse relative to something that has no such relativity. And instead of jumping at the opportunity to jaw-jack endless relativities to pass the time, if people didn't think here or there in terms of ordinary situations, and were oblivious of habitually opportunistic intellectualism, theirs would be the Unborn, which is the perspective of reality, knowing causeless unattributability as the basis of situations themselves without speculative differentiation being activated by the personality and its psychological apparatus unawares. Only those with affinity resting in the Virtue of the Receptive of potential as is could be oblivious of notions relative to nililism and its partner in extremity in describing reality at such times. Who else could nod in appreciation at the mention of the basis of complete reality as is without engendering speech relative to dualistic expression. There is absolutely nothing to miss out on… but BOING!!! Pop goes the weasel. Know what I'm talking about, mr P? Yer a teacher are ya? Mmmm-hmmmm. As if it were easier to distinguish one or the other of the two extremes than immediate knowledge expounded by the enlightening beings who wrote the classics. Evidently it is easier to spray about the relative when the basis of the real is brought up for some Grandmasters… what a hack. Confucius said, "If I give someone one corner and he can't come up with the other three, I don't talk to him any more". Been nice talkin' to ya, mr. Other than me, having caught this fish, who can cook it? I would wash out the pot.

Since discrimination cannot understand it, it is not a matter of employing words (intellectual consciousness, thoughts, feelings, unconscious value-judgements), nor is it a matter of employing anything else, i.e.: anything pertaining to meaning, self, others, situations… anything attributable. Nothing is used by the human psychological apparatus, nor is it relative to the individual. The non-usage of thoughts down to the most subtle movement of the mind-ground is harmonizing with the nature of reality. This is the realm of nonbeing, the nature of one's essential nature. This is immediate knowledge that does not involve sense-gates nor anything relative to the personality. This, of course is unacceptable to the free-associating thinkers who cannot arrive at anything without involving the self-reflective human mentality. If I mention anything tantamount to emptiness, the hoi-polloi reverberates fashionably with the dualistic mantra of nihilism. Why? Evidently because it's hip these days… other than the fact that not one of these people can come up with the siamese partner of nihilism in the same sentence, only the most astute of the professional entertainers here can conjure the speculative interpretation of entry into inconceivability as this wonderful word nihilism (with the half-life of a NYC bagel), just to kick the can a little farther down the easiest route to oblivion. That, and nihilism has just the right negative allure. It's sso baaad~ one just aught not flirt with it… hahahhahaaa!! Emptiness has always stumped the gentlemen of affairs. The only reason I know how to talk about it is because it is the nature of awareness. The way for those with no way through this ineffability (because they cannot talk about it to save themselves) is to dispense with conceptual usage of the mind long enough to instill a wonder to match the void that looms before their incredulity. Since awareness is itself not only one's selfless identity and its emptiness the living potential of creation itself, entry into inconceivability is simply arriving at a singular wonder of sincere open intent. The heart of the heaven and earth of the body of immaterial aware potential is one's own mind. Ta Hui said, "If for a single instant you can be unborn amidst causal origination, then without leaving desire, hatred and delusion, you use the seal of demon kings to drive out all demons." Don't think, "Is that how she does it?" Of course you still don't accept it. Why? Because y'all still think you're here!! Hahhahahhaahhahahahaaa!!!

Stability is the nature of awareness, yet since this has never moved, in seeing reality, we have no inclination to act outside of potential. East Mountain walks on water. A few nice responses here…❤︎

http://38.media.tumblr.com/3fb4eb51fdbe80b1c5eff80585be3e83/tumblr_n7e8b9UfJ81qedb29o1_500.gif heeheehee!!❤︎❤︎

Dawei wrote of an unbroken chain to clarify something. That's how it is, but then I thought about how it is before seeing reality, when one is part of a relative continuum since birth and childhood and one endeavors to risk one's conditional (social) identity to discover who one really is, and we become teenagers and identify with our adolescent rebelliousness— our separateness that somehow rings true …how it has to work. But then we identify as one of a totality of separatenesses and then the rawness of discovery dims (for most) and many pair off to create yet other separate unities to create yet other cycles of changing chains opening and closing again without end. What of Buddha proclaiming the way to freedom from these rounds of birth, suffering and death? When the great and ancient teachings referring to the Changeless source are tossed around by mouths that have never tasted the source of a changeless unity inspiring the classics themselves, how is it possible to open up the light of awareness as is? It cannot be opened up because it is already shining as the unity of Mind neither ignorant nor enlightened. A huge problem is that indulgence in ignorance presumptuously assumes that differences are arrived at by the same means, i.e.: thinking. Therefore if others would just think differently… Taoist alchemy teaches that people are completely good at birth, and following the natural course of development, yang eventually peaks followed by the rising of yin energies. This illustrates the chain being broken (yin energies) the first time. For most people this is simply necessary. It was for me, but it was over by age 22, living internationally. There are many instances in the hagiographies of the buddhist luminaries and taoist saints and teachers of not entering into conventional society at all. At this point in taoist alchemical teachings, in terms of the virtual culmination of yin energies, it is said that if one can somehow reverse the process and revert to what one was before one was born, one will accomplish the re-unification of one's potential within the source of reality. But that's not all. And this is where the wagging mouths crap out. Not one of the free-thinkers are able to discuss the application of such a realization of universally positive sourced experience at root of the teachings they toss around as a recreational pastime. Lately, the formulaic intelligentsia's rage is Nihilism and that's about it~ Eternalism is so out (only the god-fearing concern themselves with such trifles). So there's a bit of the inherited chain and the natural course of breaking it and then arriving at a unified selfless identity of the totality of being and nonbeing, unborn and undying. But not a word of its application. Let the philosophers with no way to apply the extreme of emptiness (that has no such emptiness) or otherwise, go on and on about nihilism as opposed to (?) until they kill any potential the subject may have held (at this point in time) for any real aha moment that could be applied in ordinary situations. By the time Stosh et al come knocking at my door …it's as dead as a doornail.❤︎ ed note: follow my own advice and change "with" to "within" in 8th paragraph, get the proper Americanism down at the last word.

That's the best we can do here. The way I read your original use of the term in that other thread was that the situation is whole. I don't even consider it in terms of a set of individuals, because there is so much more going on (or not) in terms of potential. There are times to break the chain or leave it as is. Breaking it for self-gratification ignorant of the reality of potential is NOT one of those times in terms of adapting impersonally to ordinary situations.

Smart is not good enough. Seeing reality is knowing the stability of aware nature in the midst of situations that has never moved. When one does not contemplate potential reality as things, one is the same as the potential inherent in things, including oneself. Knowledge of the timing of action or inaction is the working definition of spontaneity. After one acts, it is too late to stay or go in terms of "moving on". That is indeed weakness, i.e.: the inability to stop oneself beforehand or, the inability to see reality as is. After-the-fact, potential is the same as karmic residue, which is the same as having gone along with karmic evolution (creative energy) helplessly and unknowingly. So, aboo, what you are calling strength is, after all, retreating after it is too late. And it's not really a subtle point. I'd call that saving one's ass, at best— not strength. Aboo is referring to a conventional wisdom and psychological protocols of polite society. It is not necessarily appropriate, much less conceivable for enlightening activity~ otherwise, one is subject to convention— and that is definitely how one doesn't steal potential and take over creation.. It depends on the time, above all— and one's personal power. Seeing reality is not concerned with appearances, it is concerned with perpetual nonaction in terms of impersonal adaption to circumstances independent of circumstances. It is not just a way of saving nonpsychological energy, it is a way to live unencumbered by convention. In terms of the topic of this thread, the timely reminder is that reality is not comprehended by conventional mental or societal patterns. Inconceivability is one's own nature. Intellectual approaches to the basis of enlightening function are simply inadequate. The people I am pointing out are the intelligentsia who affect a one-dimentional ineffectual approach to the source of the classics. Most of them are perfectly satisfied with their approach because it suites their purpose. Fair enough for immortals who will live forever, and have seen the essence of their nature. Then again, immortals don't have any reason to speculate on the classics in the first place, hmmmm? That might be something to take up with an immortal to suit the occasion, should there be one. Heads up! If it applies, take it on the head or… move on.❤︎ ed note: add "of' in 3rd paragraph

Words are not it. Words only call it~ but I like your tone~ so stick around.❤︎ Diversity is not it. You are not even talking in circles. Sameness within difference is a term referring to the basis of the function of enlightening activity, not an equivocality noshing "it's all good". STOP MAKING SENSE. Reasonableness is for polite society. I can call it anything because words serve my purpose. I do not go along with meaning. I intend meaning for the purpose of those who have an affinity with inconceivability. That is all. I'm just fishing, but what's more, I'm good to go mr 'verse. I only stick around just to see who else is good to go. I have a thread called "About Me". Just so you know who you're dealing with.

Oohhhhhh~ success and progress. Complete reality has no such referencing relative to the ignorance or the enlightenment of inherent nature. Complete reality doesn't need proof~ only ignorant ambition requires this. To bad it isn't easy as you would like to imply. It only proves that you don't know what you are hoping for. (ouch!) Your self-affirmations by way of these threads you've been starting seem so futile. Why don't you just be silent and accomplish complete perfect enlightenment? It doesn't have a name and isn't attributable to people, much less your currently favorite spiritual tradition. Instead of creating new identities to spray as, why don't you take a break from your completely perfect intellectual speculations and uncertain self-affirmations? I mean, you don't actually know what it is you want as far as I can tell. If you had certainty, which you don't, you wouldn't be wasting any time trying to prove to the bums you ARE certain. What ARE you waiting for. What do you need to do first before you see your nature and borrow Padmasambhava's bitch-cat? ed note: spell you® correctly in 6th paragraph

Drop your referencing dear~ it's just more imitation on your part… just because I'm calling you on your borrowed grandstanding (both in style and content), doesn't mean that all of a sudden I don't like anything— including you. As for Zoose, how does one go on to what's NEXT when one has never stopped? In that case, there is no moving on for you, dear. Certainty is a matter of seeing neither before nor after, and seeing that there has never been the point of self-reference in between. I notice you didn't get into what constituted certainty, only that you pissed a little post and got the hell out of Dodge without actually contributing anything. THAT's what's easy. And how could you? In a hurry to rack up as many posts as possible under your new identity? What about your nonoriginated identity? See your nature easy as that (which you haven't) and then you can begin to find out how NOT EASY it is~ either before or after. But then that's how it is with recreational free (associating) thinkers. Another day at the office, huh? You needn't show up tomorrow… hehe.❤︎ WHO MIGHT HAVE THE PERSPECTIVE OF THOUGHT AFTER ENLIGHTENMENT other than the few disgruntled ones I've picked on lately, hmmmmmm? ed note: typo (') in first line

Look mr P, I don't visit you. You visit me. Study the 4th hexagram and deduce your relative position. As for you being the first to bring up nihilism, I would have never known it was going to be a trend. Did you start it or did you just jump on the band-wagon first? Like I said, you brought it to my door, I didn't deliver it to yours. I just sent it back. Why? IT DIDN'T APPLY. If you knew what my subject matter is, you wouldn't have made that mistake by accident …it would have been a deliberate mistake. Which was it? I say you didn't know what you were doing in either case. You just wanted more light on yourself. Want my lighting director do you? Hire yourself a real gaffer~ non-union if yer a real artist. ed note: add to the original two lines

oh, did i win again?!! …and who lost, yet again? And who, btw is the innocent bystander, dear one? I start new threads to respond to the ones who need to be addressed outside of the context of the threads because they don't understand the context of the old threads to begin with. As for the losers you refer to, they are like earwigs… dey sso dum, dey doe no dey done died. It's like delusion. One's delusion is by definition the state of not knowing one is deluded. I'm a shock-rockette if it's called for and I have a blade that slices and dices before you'll ever know it~ with a routine and high-kicks to match. Whup sum up side dey head~ maybe doo sum guuud. I don't want to fcuk up my own OP. Got it? Guuud. ed note: add last line

Yes, and when it is seen as just as it is without possibilities to manipulate, one needn't entertain the wellspring of privateering. Since this totality has nothing to grasp, the neurosis of separateness is what enables speculative ventures engendering karmic involvement and subsequent attachments to outcomes. Phenomniverse… DROP YOUR POINT. THIS IS NEITHER THE ONE NOR THE OTHER OF THE TWO EXTREMES. This is not philosophy. That's a nice topic, I suppose, but that topic is not this topic. Address the topic or start another nice thread about your topic. DECI DOES BEYOND CONVENTION. Do ponder where you are coming up short in terms of this arena if you want to benefit by awakening to your own inherent nature. As for sometimes… that's the way it is. Actually it's more like occasionally, at best— or even more rarely for those who have no notion to recognize reality as themselves unencumbered by a separate self that thinks up ideas to speculate on and potential to manipulate for self-gratification. Seeing reality is permanent. There is nothing to it. When one begins to see that there is nothing whatsoever to the reality you see with your own eyes, then you begin to see what the nature of stabilization of unified awareness is. Would you care to address that?

Not when you see reality. If you don't see reality as is, in ordinary situations, you see delusion. Please do not reason this out. If you don't have the basis and only make comparisons based on conventional logic, you are like a trapped cat, perhaps clever enough only to live in a trap. As we live and breath in power, why do you live in your mental constructs? Nothing does not even exist is the point. Nothing is included in things. This is to aid those who can use the assistance in shedding delusion. Are you one of those? People, this is not about nihilism or eternalism. Just get over it. When studying worldy things, one relies totally on verbal meanings and mental thoughts. But if you use verbal meanings and thoughts to study the world-transcending Dharma, you are way off. Didn't Buddha say so? —"This Dharma is not something that thought and discrimination can understand." Why do the recreational philosophers ignore this fact perpetually? Because if they took this fact to heart, they would have to fold up their tents and scatter, unable to carry on their selfish intellectual self-serving pastime with each other and take up the task of absolute solitary responsibility for their individual actions— the first of which is accounting for the fact of one's own solitary birth and death~ and following that to its ultimate conception, in order to see one's own essential nature for oneself. ed note: add 3rd paragraph and last two paragraphs

Goldisheavy is the typical worldling completely lost at the one word emptiness. People who are afraid of missing out on anything cannot step over eternity. You don't have the choice, dear. Looking outside creation is a confused terminology— the subject of this thread is the perspective of the uncreated itself. It is selfless and doesn't choose anything. You are afraid of missing out on anything and cannot abide in the inevitable. Those who have no interest in the endless fascinations of creation because they know there is only death by virtue of entry into created cycles regardless of their length in time do not concern themselves with "subjective choices with other options available". Why? Because there are no options, much less other options. Reality is. If you see reality, who needs choice? Since you do not see reality (even though it looks no different that delusion), you dabble in your imaginary self entertaining imaginary choices and actions thereby incurring karmic debt. Those who see their nature and abide in presence perpetually resultant in the clarity of selfless stabilization do not go along with viewpoints because views are relative to the imaginary identity. Your ignorant viewpoint has not changed since the last time you posed your intellectually biased reasoning in the face of the inconceivable a few years ago. Jesus said it right when he uttered that you must give up your (false) life to enter into the kingdom of god. Christian teaching is an oxymoron. Jesus Christ has never been recognized for his straightforward enlightening teaching. BTW, the kingdom of god is a euphemism for seeing reality and living free of karmic evolution. But you want your subjective choice, huh? That's the only choice you had to make because your default choice was made without even knowing there is another choice. That's the one that frees you from delusion. Yet in your ignorance you claim that enlightening beings have creation to look outside of!! There is only one mind and it is uncreated. Mind is the seat of awareness. Your own mind that sees (such as it does) is already uncreated. You insist on using your thieving conscious awareness relative to an imaginary self to determine (for yourself) what other subjective choices there are that must be sacrificed in order to reach a viewpoint that is already unattributable and inherent (not to mention the fact that you have yet to awaken to it). Enlightening being is not subjective. Your own enlightening being is not the person. Mind only knows. It doesn't think. You cannot grasp, much less comprehend inconceivability with the intellectual apparatus relative to the mind that thinks. Ya gotta be able to drop it at will and pick it up at will. THAT'S FREEDOM. You are abusing the purpose of a mere mental functionary subjective capacity as the mind itself. Your thinking mind is not who you are and YOU DO NOT KNOW THAT. Jesus also said "I am the light". That is what you are. I am the light. I know it. Why don't you know you are the light? That's the same as saying "Why don't you recognize reality? You don't see reality because of your subjective personalistic views relative to an ignorant intellectual fallacy you think exists. Since your point of view is utterly myopic, you believe there is no other kind of awareness. Pity.

No one sees my weapons of dentelle noire…❤︎

Reality has absolutely no discernible point to grasp in terms of personalistic views of "agreement" or "disagreement". Either you see reality or you don't.

Belief in aspects of a surviving individual absolutism, whether it be a mystical abstraction or an independently originated self with an extra-existential spiritual separate identity (transmundane created soul) attributable to (?), is termed "eternalism", as there is something that lasts. Belief in the ultimate destruction of a created self on whatever level it can be conceived in an overarching sense of futility is termed "nihilism", in that nothing lasts. The reality is that nothing is created. Therefore life and death is the definition of karmic process, creative evolution, circumstantial causal relative existence. If one sees one's nature, it becomes evident that there is no such thing as anything. The palpable feeling of the absence of even nothing is the simple experience of the immaterial energy of aware nonoriginated selfless nonbeing, which is the uncreated potential primal knowing essential nature of human being: enlightened awareness. Seeing one's own awareness in ordinary situations as selfless uncreated and utterly immovable in terms of karmic evolution is recognizing reality. It does not depend on anything outside of mind itself. Self-refinement is refining this little bit of reality until it is complete reality, with no inside or outside. Sudden enlightenment is just a natural resonance with one's enlightening activity outside of creation experienced as the true self by itself. The person does not experience it— only the inner self sees itself. The inner self is nonoriginated selfless awareness— your own mind right now. What is stopping you from recognizing reality as is as your own mind right now? It's not some other mind, not some other reality, some other time. Other than you, no one knows— even so, there is nothing outside of immediate presence to carry you through. There is nothing to know. Reality doesn't look any different than delusion. Reality is your own mind without attaching to personalistic views relative to self and other, right or wrong. Views are. Detach from them and see the nature of your own mind in the midst of ordinary affairs. It doesn't require deliberation or making arrangements beforehand. ed note: add last paragraph