Yes, that’s the ‘shut door’.
There is no door…there’s only awakening from the dream of the door and the key and the opening and all the rest of it.
Yes, let’s wake up!..
May the brain wake up from the dreams we are…
As well as the nightmares.
The advantage of starting this thread callled “emptiness” is that I can interfere by saying " plz …hold your horses"
We can agree that we do not know what emptiness is, though the feeling might be overwhelming and therefore it seems that we build up a resistance which expresses itself in various forms.
So it might be interesting to go a bit deeper in this resistance is and its outcome (in oneself and in the"outer"), which we have to consider as one movement, no?
It is clear that whenever there is a kind of resistance there is or must be an interruption (or conflict)between the “what is” and the “what should be”.
I am sure that we all could be aware of this resistance and have been aware of it.
So, can we talk this over?
.
Emptiness, silence, freedom, is the ending of the domination of psychological thinking. It is the ‘blossoming’ of the human mind. No “resistance” because there is no one to resist.
What we don’t know is what “emptiness” you were referring to when you started this thread, and why you never made it clear.
So it might be interesting to go a bit deeper in this resistance is and its outcome (in oneself and in the"outer"), which we have to consider as one movement, no?
So now you’re changing the subject from “emptiness” to “resistance”, no?
I am sure that we all could be aware of this resistance and have been aware of it. So, can we talk this over?
Can we talk about your confusion?
And the unbearable feeling of emptiness would be the opposite of that.
But there is resistance and I want to learn about it. Not about what happens when there is no resistance.
It is again an example of the friction between what is and what should be.
Are we serious enough to see this happening? Or is all this merely an intellectual entertainment?
This seems significant. It comes across as “self consciousness” in its mundane (ie before we become confused by spiritual teachings) and uncomfortable, disagreable sense.
More to do with recognition than awareness. More knowledge than silence.
Is this not the sickness of the observation of self, without a total understanding of the self?
PS I’m not meaning to attack anyone in particular, I really think this is an important issue
Yes. The conditioned brain is incapable of observation without the observer, and we could call this its “sickness”. For a “total understanding of the self”, the sick brain must cease its sickening activity.
1 Like
Are we serious enough to find out how confused we are?
1 Like
We call it sickening activity but we do not leave it aside!
My theory is that we don’t really care about the mess we make.
Like maybe its not my fault, God (or intelligence) should have provided me with insight.
This is what we believe should-be, and it may be true, but until/unless the brain is beyond belief, this is as close to truth as it can get.
That’s why “sickness” isn’t the best word for our condition. It takes time to recover from sickness, but the end of our condition takes no time at all because it ends when the brain sees for the first and last time what it is doing.
To leave something aside, there must be the two elements of the leaver and the left, and the act of choosing what to do, i.e., dualism, our sickness, our limitation, our condition.
What are we saying? All I have is this knowledge? What I know is the whole of my existence - and all that really means anything to me?
And so what I know goes on fueling its condition?
S.o. talked about "mondaine consciousness’ . The consciousness that has been put together by thought, through our conditioning . And we know that it is not real.
Mind you that I am not saying or pretending that I know what is real, I can only apprehend which is false.
And this might be the real question : do I?
Do I see that every thought, how clever it might have been put together acts as a fuel ( like s.o. suggested), to sustain thought itself?
Take it just as a consideration.
What did K mean by “the content of consciousness”? If I’m not mistaken, that content is what limits the brain to a believe-or-not-believe, this-or-that, dualistic response to actuality. The best the conditioned brain can do is admit what it does not know, what it cannot believe, and do what it can to find out what is demonstrably true or false.
Is there demonstrable proof that “my existence” is what I say it is, not more imagined than what the facts indicate? Likewise with what is supposedly mine.
This is my little elaboration @fraggle
I was probably born with the cup filled by all the humans who lived before me, I had no choice to choose an empty cup.
I can re-arrange the content of this cup in my own particular way, which gives me a sense that I can act, but in a confined space, which is not mine (?), yet it becomes mine (or is it mine ?) if not emptied.