[deci belle]

Sorry, but a bum just asked why deci is the way she is. I've been thinking it's time for another bump of my old It's about Me thread, but this may serve better.

 

I'll try not to flatter myself too much as the PM suggested that I might actually have some real understanding!! Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeheehee!!

 

 

I'm assuming (dangerous) you get this a lot, but:

Why the verbiage? It almost comes off as an elitist thing. Is it that you only want people with a certain intellect to be able to understand your posts?

I don't mean to accuse you of anything or be rude, I'm just really curious. I mean of course I wouldn't be writing this if it didn't bug me that you write the way you do, but I can leave your posts alone and more or less let it go. So...I'm being a bit confrontational, but really I'm curious.

It seems like you enjoy calling people out. And you enjoy writing things in nearly the most complicated way you can come up with.

So...why do you post? To seek out the few with the education and intellect to stand eye to eye with you and have that level of conversation? Just to get your thoughts out there?

I have a hard time believing it's to expand anyone's understanding of the Tao. It seems as though if you were attempting to help people, you would state things plainly and simply.

I've noticed your enlightenment posts, and how hard it is to get past the words and down to the meaning. I've noticed your posts which simply call people out.

I'm only on the beginning of my path, but I guess what annoys me is this: you seem to have some real understanding. Yet the Tao seems to be about simplicity, and the basics. And not sniping at people.

It's confusing to me.

So...your motivations are your own business. But if you don't mind shedding some light on them for me, that would be nice.

Or if you've already gone over this in one of your posts, just point me in that direction.

Thanks.

 

It's so sincere… this is a wonderful letter. Thank you so much for taking the time to write it!!

 

If you have a sufficient affinity with reality you will eventually be able to see through all of this at once.

 

You say that I seem to have real understanding. Don't take this notion for granted. Others such as you have done so themselves, but are unable to divorce themselves from social concerns to explore it intimately. One must be audacious in this regard. Either way, there are no survivors.

 

Do you have any idea how you can come to that vague conclusion while others have spent their entire time here (and preceding forums) wondering why I refute the complacent pastime of recreational speculation on the philosophical treatment of the classics transmitting Complete Reality left behind by enlightened people for the purpose of keeping the real knowledge alive? And why would I? Well, because there are a few who are ready for entry into the inconceivable. I have to find them, and honesty is the best disguise.

 

People think I am outrageous and delusional until something deep inside them switches and then they spontaneously see what my deal is about. They see it's not my deal.

 

To answer my question directly, you sense reality in the aspect of myself that resonates in you. Just focus on that and let the rest fall away from now on. It's an act I didn't script. It's just the way it seems to be, based on circumstantial conditions and the selfless potential inherent in this very situation called taobums as it unfolds.

 

To answer you directly: there is no expanding one's understanding of the tao. One can only enter its mystery which is one's own inconceivable nature. It is not a moral imperative. It is a fabulous mystery of mysteries. It is already as it is: complete, without origination; it's you now.

 

In Jesus' parlance, its effect by virtue of the source's power is to live outside of bondage to karma which he called the kingdom of god. Do you know what Jesus said is necessary to enter the kingdom of god? He said, that you must give up your life to enter the kingdom of god.

 

And what constitutes the life you must give up? All that is required is to forget the mind that thinks it exists. All else will develop naturally. Innocence is inherent, which is selflessness, the nature of awareness. Do you believe it is easy to forget this mind that thinks it exists?

 

There is no understanding it. Period. It is the way it is for no reason and nobody knows why.

 

I am so outrageous in order to cut through the guff and to keep the riff-raff (those too thick to see the real but just smart enough to get in the way) at bay. I'm not here to gather people together, but to spy out those who have affinity. How else would you notice me? Not by my hiding behind convention you wouldn't. It is necessary for you to approach me by virtue of your own recognition of an affinity with reality. Your own sincere openness to the wonder of it all is just it.

 

You carry this out on your own, independently. I am not a teacher. I just see reality.

 

I do hide in plain site in real life— but not here!!

 

Self refinement is the process of eliminating the habitual patterns of the human intellect which does nothing but seek to understand things on ITS terms. Reality must be dealt with on its terms, not the self-reifying intellect's position. There is no should in this focus of intent.

 

Because reality is not a thing, there is no position to understand in terms of that which has no position to begin with. Reality is beginningless. That is not a matter of time. It's uncreated.

 

Tao is your own aware potential being. You can't understand that. It is only possible to arrive at the basis of your own nature and see this ineffabiity as yourself before time even as it is right now.

 

Forget about my appearances. It's just a spontaneous affair that effectively lets all hell break loose from time to time to sort out the riff-raff. It doesn't matter to me at all.

 

If the owner of this website dug my presence, it would be an entirely different scene, but he resents it, and so do others who believe that I'm using this site for my own gain as they are themselves using things for their own gain and they are so sure that I think like them. I'm not playing the same game— but it's not within the ken of the intellectual mental capacity to comprehend my purpose. It isn't a matter of understanding, as I have told you. Since Complete Reality can't be expanded on, one must endeavor to enter its fathomless mystery at the expense of one's own puny false identity. It's the deal of the century.

 

Buddhahood is just spontaneously seeing reality as is without thoughts reflecting an existential self, plain and simple. It can become natural after a long long time, hence the need for self-refinement leading to and progressing further in the aftermath of sudden realization. There is no end to its profundity. A lifetime is a puny affair, but that's the way it is. One just enters reality audaciously without thoughts of what if.

 

I didn't start out this way here, but NO ONE here has seen their nature and is able to describe it at all. Period.— I have and I do. But my sense of FUCK IT has developed out of having to blow the dim-wits out of the literalist philosophical complacency that runs amok here, just to get them to realize that we're not even discussing the same reality. Why? So a few people will recognize their own sense of inconceivability in themselves and begin to enter it themselves.

 

My writing is a different story. It is a spontaneous free-flowing expository writing based on enlightening experience, both gradual and sudden, and my focus is in its application in terms of ordinary affairs— since that is how I came to experience it myself in the first place.

 

I have done in-depth study and carried out practical gradual and transcendent experience over several decades in Nagual Shamanism, Complete Reality Taoism and Chan Buddhism without identifying with teachers, teachings or traditions. The Tao isn't taoist.

 

I call people out for reasons that you may come to find out yourself. I make no apologies for it.

 

 

 

 

ed note: typos

Edited September 3, 2014 by deci belle

[Spotless]

I'm hooked!

 

You are among one of the finest I have come across - probably the best - in holding ones presence to the pivot point of that most precious realization / event. And if I find myself judging you in the meantime it gives me sight of exactly that which I do not need.

 

I am here for this discussion that you always bring to bear - it is the only discussion - the rest is Buzz.

Edited September 3, 2014 by Spotless

[Protector]

Maybe I should make a thread explaining why I'm so cool

 

 

It's horse stance

 

[Silent Answers]

If you really find meaning in such practice...remember that when fishing you need the right bait/tools. Instead it seems like you're using a harpoon to catch hatchlings, while the real prizes keep their distance, and stay off the menu.

[joeblast]

Why the verbiage...imho, when you've spent considerable time in verbiage land and seek accuracy (and precision helps sometimes, too)...you just come across many descriptive words in your travels, and find use for them in places. Sometimes being very descriptive necessitates the usage of the lesser known words and phrases out there, always done for a reason...

 

That's why I suggested having the morgan freeman of one's mind's eye read it to them. Its a slow method of reading, but its a good marinade

[Spotless]

Why the verbiage...imho, when you've spent considerable time in verbiage land and seek accuracy (and precision helps sometimes, too)...you just come across many descriptive words in your travels, and find use for them in places. Sometimes being very descriptive necessitates the usage of the lesser known words and phrases out there, always done for a reason...

 

That's why I suggested having the morgan freeman of one's mind's eye read it to them. Its a slow method of reading, but its a good marinade

 

I did for a time think this very same thing - so much so that I regularly passed over Deci.

But then one day I stayed with a passage and was fairly astounded by it.

 

Consequently, I have found the unbending tenacity of the style and content to have a very specific and consciously formulated effect. It is vividly clear that many will not "hear" it, see it or experience it - but so few are ready and it is not directed to them.

 

 

[Nikolai1]

Hi decibelle or anyone,

 

Could anyone please post a link to a classic decibelle thread - am very intrigued to read it?

[Apech]

Hi decibelle or anyone,

 

Could anyone please post a link to a classic decibelle thread - am very intrigued to read it?

 

Click on Deci Belle screen name to go to profile. Then click on 'topics'. First make some popcorn and soft drink of your choosing ... making sure you have a few days spare.

[Nikolai1]

Thanks I found this on google and I'm with spotless, i think it's great

 

http://thetaobums.com/topic/35910-recognizing-reality/

[juliank]

I love Deci's posts. I think her writing style is just divine. I don't always read all her posts due to time constraints but when I do I enjoy it thoroughly. Incisive thinker, great prose, and is one of the few bums I would like to meet in person.

[Phenomniverse]

Thanks for sharing Deci. You've inspired me to sharpen my own wisdom sword by any and all means.

[deci belle]

Yes~ Thank you all!!❤︎❤︎

 

Harpoon~ hahahahhahahaahhahahhahahaa!! By the time one jumps into the pot, nothing's there anyway… hahahaha!!

 

Then again, one must be fairly biG game just to see me.

 

And thanks to you for the navigational beta, Apech…❤︎

 

 

 

 

ed note: remember to thank Apech too

Edited September 5, 2014 by deci belle

[deci belle]

I have a link on my posts and also on my profile page to see the posts from here that I have put on my tumbler blog, but it might be more fun to just fish around here and see what pops up randomly.

[zanshin]

...

 

 

Edited February 10, 2016 by zanshin

[Daeluin]

One particular question remains to me.

 

In the About Me thread, deci speaks of using the Tao Te Ching as a guide to wizardry. Yet I find the Tao Te Ching to advocate compassion and humility.

 

So I'd like to ask deci what she thinks of compassion and humility. Are they important for those of us reaching for reality?

 

Edit: Or maybe compassion and humility are not necessary at the level of those to whom deci seeks affinity with?

Edited September 5, 2014 by Daeluin

[deci belle]

Because the ineffable is knowledge of experience, not psychology, it is possible to describe, but not explain… so words are specifically ordered, not to make rational sense, but to describe the nature of reality in terms of reality as it is experienced.

 

This is the logic of my writing.

 

Experience is knowledge. "It is not beneficial to cultivate mental postures in the aftermath of experience because being is inherent in knowledge: to be is to know."

 

If people do develop a taste for the alchemy of Complete Reality, not cultivating mental postures in the aftermath of experience occurring at levels corresponding with one's current depth of affinity is an ever-evolving process. This means that one's depth of practice and gravity of self-transformation is commensurate with one's measure of virtuous response.

 

The point is, that by not intellectualizing (self-reifying) experiences in their aftermath, the power of potential (knowledge) is sealed away and not leaked. It is not something anyone understands, yet it is possible to carry out oneself in ordinary situations to save and amass nonpsychological energy over a long period of time by not minding. One just forgets thoughts and feelings relative to experience.

 

It's like eating. You don't think about it~ and the body digest food naturally. In the aftermath of experience, the impersonal immaterial body of awareness absorbs the nonpsychological potential of experience naturally.

 

This is how one enters the Way. Really it is just resting in the highest good of open sincerity and then the virtue of this selfless nonobjective intent becomes the space for the Way to coalesce.

[deci belle]

In the PM, the point of "letting go" came up…

 

Well, it's not really "letting it go" in a literal sense, because our own experiences in terms of events are by virtue of the situation, and we cannot have the attitude of being an innocent bystander, because there is no such thing as that. We have to take responsibility for everything.

 

Why? Because the truth is that we are not separate. What you are referring to as "letting go" is, for the purpose of using situations for self-refinement, a matter of psychological detachment without manufacturing mental postures by ruminating in the aftermath of ordinary events.

 

So even if we must make a full withdrawal from a situation— even it is a matter of blowing it away emotionally on account of some traumatic experience, it is imperative to not mull over the event and create a psychological posture because doing so only creates a false notion of separateness in terms of our own being by constituting a false relativity where the reality is absolute unity. To create a psychological posture and throw away the situation relative to it is to throw away the forgoing achievement of the actual experience, in terms of spiritual alchemy where absorption of the unrefined potential inherent in the situation is naturally processed simply by not dwelling on thoughts and feelings.

 

Divorcing oneself from the situation is giving away your own potential. Losing your own potential in this way is what ordinary ignoramuses do routinely.

 

Experiencing situations good or bad without creating views of self and other is the working definition of "self-refinement". We also do not entertain ideas pertaining to outcomes relative to our involvement in the context of situations.

 

Eventually, we find out what happened in the end.

 

Eventually, if our adaption to situations is sufficiently "impersonal", we can come to notice an imperceptible quality of freedom relative to the situation were we can come or go independent of former limitations without having let anything go.

 

"Letting go" relative to the being that is going to die is actually a capitulation of sorts~ like "throwing in the towel".

 

Spiritual alchemy is a matter of absorption of potential. Arbitrary capitulation is actually bondage to the flow of created cycles without knowing it. Real practice is a matter of holding firmly and then releasing according to the timing of the situation. This is up to oneself alone.

 

So, in the interval of "holding firm" where we practice innocence in the aftermath of experience void of intellectualization, "letting go" is letting go of thoughts and feelings— not the unrefined creative potential.

 

After we sense Changing, when the situation has transformed without you, you discover that there is now nothing to let go of. This is the time when the previously unrefined potential has become immaterial "spiritual elixir".

 

Reality is nonpsychological. The trick is to adapt to situations selflessly which is just nonpsychological observation of situations during involvement and nopsychological storage in the withdrawal during the aftermath of experience.

 

It is a matter of a certain kind of unconventional letting go in the midst of situations.

 

This is a description of the firing process in terms of ordinary affairs.

[Daeluin]

Edit: reply is to #16

 

Well I resonate with that - even though in this very thread others speak of applying heightened intellect to understand your writing, even if you don't intellectualize as composition unfolds.

 

I resonate with most of your writing, and find it sincere.

 

But my dissonance radar goes off when you reply to those you don't have affinity with, and I see two polarized camps develop from what appears to be a deliberate motive to shape your audience. I can understand the desire to speak to those with ears, and I see the distraction of those who only think they hear. But in the end they create noise whether or not you ignore them, speak to them, or push them away. So why the shaping of this polarity, rather than simply letting people believe what they will. Some of your replies feel very laden with ego - perhaps to you this is a very trivial level expression barely blemishing the surface of your connection to reality, but to others like myself it is felt with emotion, which then blends with the other poignant transmissions you offer and confuses things.

 

Once upon a time I was sitting to 4-5 hour talks with a master. From time to time others would invite friends to come and hear, and a lot of emphasis was placed on screening these friends. Well once someone's friend showed up, sat front and center, and would constantly nod and "mmhmm", "oh yeah", to what the master spoke of. After 30 minutes or so this person would break into this master's transmission and ask him questions about other masters - "do you know so and so?"

 

He took it all in stride, and slowly the shape of the conversation changed, and he started speaking about how some people would condition themselves to dump their bliss rather than integrating it, and elaborated for some minutes on this. It was clear to us this guest was the subject of the conversation, and was quite educational to those of us paying attention. After another hour or so the guest became bored and left early, never managing to derail the discussion, but actually substantially adding to our education.

 

I'm not saying this is how to deal with intruders - but rather that there might be ways of dealing with intruders without creating ripples and derailing the discussion. I know of others who simply ignore whatever rumors spread about them - to oppose is to maintain, after all. Those who smell the wisdom see the false reputation for what it is, and focus on what is important. So I am somewhat surprised to learn you entertain and nourish this polarity on purpose. What does it gain you?

Edited September 6, 2014 by Daeluin

[Daeluin]

In the PM, the point of "letting go" came up…

 

Well, it's not really "letting it go" in a literal sense, because our own experiences in terms of events are by virtue of the situation, and we cannot have the attitude of being an innocent bystander, because there is no such thing as that. We have to take responsibility for everything.

 

Why? Because the truth is that we are not separate. What you are referring to as "letting go" is, for the purpose of using situations for self-refinement, a matter of psychological detachment without manufacturing mental postures by ruminating in the aftermath of ordinary events.

 

So even if we must make a full withdrawal from a situation— even it is a matter of blowing it away emotionally on account of some traumatic experience, it is imperative to not mull over the event and create a psychological posture because doing so only creates a false notion of separateness in terms of our own being by constituting a false relativity where the reality is absolute unity. To create a psychological posture and throw away the situation relative to it is to throw away the forgoing achievement of the actual experience, in terms of spiritual alchemy where absorption of the unrefined potential inherent in the situation is naturally processed simply by not dwelling on thoughts and feelings.

 

Divorcing oneself from the situation is giving away your own potential. Losing your own potential in this way is what ordinary ignoramuses do routinely.

 

Experiencing situations good or bad without creating views of self and other is the working definition of "self-refinement". We also do not entertain ideas pertaining to outcomes relative to our involvement in the context of situations.

 

Eventually, we find out what happened in the end.

 

Eventually, if our adaption to situations is sufficiently "impersonal", we can come to notice an imperceptible quality of freedom relative to the situation were we can come or go independent of former limitations without having let anything go.

 

"Letting go" relative to the being that is going to die is actually a capitulation of sorts~ like "throwing in the towel".

 

Spiritual alchemy is a matter of absorption of potential. Arbitrary capitulation is actually bondage to the flow of created cycles without knowing it. Real practice is a matter of holding firmly and then releasing according to the timing of the situation. This is up to oneself alone.

 

So, in the interval of "holding firm" where we practice innocence in the aftermath of experience void of intellectualization, "letting go" is letting go of thoughts and feelings— not the unrefined creative potential.

 

After we sense Changing, when the situation has transformed without you, you discover that there is now nothing to let go of. This is the time when the previously unrefined potential has become immaterial "spiritual elixir".

 

Reality is nonpsychological. The trick is to adapt to situations selflessly which is just nonpsychological observation of situations during involvement and nopsychological storage in the withdrawal during the aftermath of experience.

 

It is a matter of a certain kind of unconventional letting go in the midst of situations.

 

This is a description of the firing process in terms of ordinary affairs.

 

Thank you, this is beautifully worded.

 

I find this to be the concept of maintaining sincerity. The importance of the continuous operation of the furnace and cauldron.

 

Yes, we must remain responsible for every interaction. We must keep our wings flapping or spread, soaring, otherwise we won't remain flying for very long. Giving in and going out for a drink rather than facing the rising winds in our path may mean we must rebuild months of progress.

 

I suppose this is what I am asking you about:

 

 

When I see a fat fellow, I slice.

 

How does slicing fat fellows allow you the freedom to avoid getting netted up in the resulting reactions and energetic exchanges?

 

Eventually, if our adaption to situations is sufficiently "impersonal", we can come to notice an imperceptible quality of freedom relative to the situation were we can come or go independent of former limitations without having let anything go.

 

Aren't there more elegant ways to respond and slip past the energetic tendrils reaching at you?

[9th]

[deci belle]

To slice is nice and should suffice.

 

Therefore those who do not even know they have been and insist are those whose status is crowed ignorance.

 

I offer no apology for slicing fat men. It pays to be a thin man, non?

 

It's is not possible to spoon-feed or describe reality to those with no mouth or ears for the inconceivable.

 

The point is that these clowns have nothing invested in reality, nor in keeping the knowledge alive— nor in developing a peerless holistic topic of their own on threads independently, other than spitting out a speculative topic and saying "come on and get it", thinking this is the epitome of generosity. Facetious and insincere they approach me, I do not approach them.

 

No one is entitled to reality. Investing one's life is the investment required for entry into selfless wonder.

 

Philosophical speculation being untested by reference to the self is the definition of recreational free-thinkers. It's cheap.

 

I slice. Get used to it.

[Daeluin]

Oh I dunno about getting used to anything, but I appreciate your explanation.

 

To me, slicing makes things personal, and you just spoke of becoming sufficiently impersonal so as to affect spiritual freedom. Seems contradictory to me... rather than being impersonal to find freedom, you slice your way free in a one sided way.

 

This is what I was leading to with compassion and humility. To me, compassion and humility are ways to affect the impersonal reward of freedom you mention, and no force is required to cut one's self free. I feel compassion and humility in many of your posts, but not when you slice. Perhaps I'm miss-understanding what drives you to slice.

[deci belle]

Sliced.

[Daeluin]

Sliced.

 

Edit: deci opened this thread to answer questions about her nature. I chose to take this opportunity to sincerely ask about her slicing. When db declared "Sliced." above, I felt this as a deliberate and unwarranted attack, and thus responded in kind with my own "Sliced", so as to maintain our energetic balance. To not reply in balance would be to invite an imbalanced exchange of energy between us, as outlined in #17.

 

However, that is not the only way to deal with this uninvited aggression and I wish to amend my response.

 

deci belle, your slicing cuts through nothing of mine but emptiness. Slice as you like, I invite you. My sincerity remains unaffected and your verbal declarations, which in no way address my posts, reach no depth. In addition, I have done my best to avoid placing any attachment beyond curiosity to this polarity I identified, and that curiosity has now been satisfied. Unless further attacked I see no further reason to answer you.

 

Until our paths cross again, in any case.... the wind blows where the wind wills....

Edited September 7, 2014 by Daeluin

[deci belle]

ok fatty~

 

About Me


Whether or not I forego conclusions
or shower you with heavy hearts
if I am here at all
It's not for approbation
it's not for polite discussion
it's not for the social repartee
not for friendship or camaraderie
nor for sharing understanding or exchanging ideas;
I offer no explanation or analysis of Complete Reality.

Having gone all the way myself
I only point at the source of impersonal awareness
so others will know it is the same as their own everyday mind
and that the matter of life and death is the crux of awareness;
long life and eternal vision must be discovered personally.

I have nothing to say to literalists, rationalists,
those entertaining recreational philosophy
or methodologists clinging to formal practices
or doctrines of religious, sexual or social convention
except for an occasional bolt of ruthless compassion.

If you think you have thoroughgoing understanding of the wonder
I will reprove your understanding for you.
If I send it back, forget it;
you can be sure I do.

If there is a thing you consider not yourself
it is obvious you do not see the empty kalpa.
Even if you do see, the vertical must be dissolved
and leveled before you can make use of it.