Absolutely free of fear

(Forgive the intrusion, but Galo seems to have left us with his statement.)

There may be no experiencer. There may only ever be thought interpreting what it meets. This interpretation gives rise to the sense of an interpreter; and this interpreter then assumes the role of observer and experiencer. Thought can’t be frightened, afraid or terrified unless it creates an identity that is capable of getting caught up in its own mistakes.

Are we separate in any way from thought? Do we exist at all outside of thought?


Until just recently I thought of ‘experience’ as some special occurrence but this morning it occurred to me that it was what was taking place in me and around me at that moment: I was simply experiencing…so it was a shock when it came to me that “there may be no experiencer at all” , that the experiencer is the experience. That the habitual sense of a duality is the conditioning, the illusion that is spoken of.

1 Like

Let’s look at the nature of this shock. Is an experiencer still active in it? Or does thought receive a jolt and immediately bring back in the concept of an experiencer? The jolt being not what was said or conveyed by the statement but the immense emptiness of the fact. Thought’s interpretation of the fact is what triggers the experience.

1 Like

Yes the “emptiness” of it but thought says ‘aha, this is what you are looking for, this is significant, call it back again, there is freedom here etc, etc.


The reason that one can’t solve the problem of fear is duality. At the moment of fear is one different than fear or one is fear? If one is different one can act upon fear, suppress it, ignore it or go to a psychotherapist and so on. But if one is fear and there is no space between him and fear then one cannot act upon it. One is fear.
The word fear has a negative connotation therefore condemnatory. Can one look at fear without the word “fear” or the word “anxiety” and so on because words are a distraction in observation?

1 Like

While there are ideas in play, thought as the experiencer can continue. So the experiencer can play with the idea of its own non-existence. Thus it avoids the fact of its own emptiness. And it is a fact that thought is entirely empty.

Perhaps there is no reason; and there never can be a reason. Because it is our reasons that keep alive the duality. So at the very moment of explaining fear we are sowing the seeds of its own continuity.

One is fear. That’s absolute freedom right there: to be entirely what one is. It is only the struggle to break away that keeps one tied to fear. But to be fear is to be thought. And thought is entirely empty.

1 Like

What is thought and thinking? Before assuming we exist, find out what is thought and it will become clear. Asking the right question is more important that finding an answer.

Do you see the danger in your questions? Or do you think they are still worth investigating?

Who or what is doing the finding out? The activity of finding out belongs to thought. And while it is finding out, it exists. Therefore, the longer it takes to find out, the longer it continues to exist. So there soon comes a point in enquiry where continuity is much more important to thought than any actual sense of finding out or of discovering the truth about itself. But the truth about the nature of thought is right at the beginning; it is not something that has to be found out.


You are not finding out. You are avoiding the question. You speculate what would happen if you were to find out. Why do we speculate and analyse, and not simply “find out” factually. What is truth?

What exactly is the question? I may have missed it.

If I make only small, inconsequential mistakes, I have no fear of “getting caught up in” my mistakes. But since there are others who make huge, consequential mistakes that adversely affect others, there is much to fear and be wary of, so fear is a fact of human existence, regardless of whether I’m generating it or not.

I may have no fear (be free) of contributing to the evil that others, deliberately or unintentionally do, but I am directly affected by their behavior, so I live in constant fear. In other words, as liberating as it is to be innocent, I exist in the climate of fear that is our environment and I’m not “free” of its effects.

Is fear constant or it comes when there is a crisis ? Some event evokes fear or anger. And if is not resolved it becomes the ground for illnesses. There is no fear now but there may be in the future. So future is the problem …

It comes when a crisis subsides and thought takes over. Psychological thought is constant fear because it takes over most of our lives. But, also, psychological thought is unnecessary for most of our living. All it can do is create a lot of pictures.

I’m recalling Max Greene saying this.:slightly_smiling_face:

Sorry, who is Max Greene?

Are you speaking from thought?

When something is a fact, there is no speaker. The mountain is there; you don’t need someone to say, ‘The mountain is there.’ Psychological thought is there; it is active right now in our relationship. That’s fear, isn’t it? It can’t be anything else. You may want to call it doubt, suspicion, hesitancy, or a dozen other things, but it is basically fear in one guise or another. The fact is there. Are you able to meet the fact?

You either speak from thought or you speak from an insight. Which one are you talking form?

It doesn’t matter. One way or another, you want to catch me out. Have insight into this, and the rest answers itself. Insight means to see a fact without any resistance or distortion.