|
Post by whiteshaman on Dec 16, 2012 10:57:58 GMT -5
Greetings.. Hi brother and welcome. I'm kinda new here too. While I agree with this post, I have to ask myself why do we even come here and do this forum thing. Self, no self, isness, suspending thought and seeing is what is being talked about but lets face it...if it's being talked about, debated even, it's something else. It seems what you speak of, what the self/no selfers speak of, if truly grasped, would create silence. But it doesn't so the obvious reason is that peeps are all talking out of their ashes.... It's all good, don't get me wrong but lets see it for what it is. Hi WS: What is obvious to you may not be obvious to others.. what i speak of, 'stillness', and even 'silence', is not related to noise or sound, it is a state of mind, a state of awareness.. a state where the is no 'mental dialogue', which is itself an odd condition, i mean the dialogue is happening in your mind, talking with yourself.. Rather than, " It seems what you speak of, what the self/no selfers speak of, if truly grasped, would create silence", it has been my experience that it reveals clarity, and.. for those intervals of 'stillness', the mind's filter of beliefs, conditioning, expectations, simply fall away, exposing the experiencer to Life happening.. so, rather than 'creating silence', it is my experience that it creates understanding.. understanding my relationship with Life and existence, understanding the interconnectedness of all 'that is', and understanding the relationship of 'All That Is' with the 'Void', the absence of 'isness'.. The 'still mind' isn't 'grasped', it's realized, revealed, it happens, often unintentionally, occasionally through intentional choice.. and, if the result of the 'still mind' experience doesn't conform to expectations, it isn't " the obvious reason is that peeps are all talking out of their ashes...", it is more likely that the participants are not understanding each other's use of language, or that there is a misunderstanding of the 'Body Mind Spirit' relationship.. What i find 'liberating', when the mind is still, is the absence of 'reaction reflexes', insisting or resisting.. where the mind is analyzing, evaluating, remembering, predicting and trying to establish a conceptual relationship with an experience that has already passed, and in the process being distracted from the experience currently unfolding, "lost in thought" so to say.. 'Self' or 'no self', neither is liberating by my account, as it distracts the mind by engaging it in conceptualizing, but.. there is the certainty that each manifested human has its own unique perspective, its own unique history of experiences and relationships with Life, and.. each unique human presence exerts its own force upon Life and existence.. bantering over how to label that relationship is not nearly as important as we seem to 'think' it is.. Be well.. Hi Tzu, Very nicely explained. I appreciate the time taken and the energy of your words in reply to my post. Peace, James
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Dec 16, 2012 11:54:36 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings..Hi WS: What is obvious to you may not be obvious to others.. what i speak of, 'stillness', and even 'silence', is not related to noise or sound, it is a state of mind, a state of awareness.. a state where the is no 'mental dialogue', which is itself an odd condition, i mean the dialogue is happening in your mind, talking with yourself.. Rather than, " It seems what you speak of, what the self/no selfers speak of, if truly grasped, would create silence", it has been my experience that it reveals clarity, and.. for those intervals of 'stillness', the mind's filter of beliefs, conditioning, expectations, simply fall away, exposing the experiencer to Life happening.. so, rather than 'creating silence', it is my experience that it creates understanding.. understanding my relationship with Life and existence, understanding the interconnectedness of all 'that is', and understanding the relationship of 'All That Is' with the 'Void', the absence of 'isness'.. The 'still mind' isn't 'grasped', it's realized, revealed, it happens, often unintentionally, occasionally through intentional choice.. and, if the result of the 'still mind' experience doesn't conform to expectations, it isn't " the obvious reason is that peeps are all talking out of their ashes...", it is more likely that the participants are not understanding each other's use of language, or that there is a misunderstanding of the 'Body Mind Spirit' relationship.. What i find 'liberating', when the mind is still, is the absence of 'reaction reflexes', insisting or resisting.. where the mind is analyzing, evaluating, remembering, predicting and trying to establish a conceptual relationship with an experience that has already passed, and in the process being distracted from the experience currently unfolding, "lost in thought" so to say.. 'Self' or 'no self', neither is liberating by my account, as it distracts the mind by engaging it in conceptualizing, but.. there is the certainty that each manifested human has its own unique perspective, its own unique history of experiences and relationships with Life, and.. each unique human presence exerts its own force upon Life and existence.. bantering over how to label that relationship is not nearly as important as we seem to 'think' it is.. Be well.. Hi Tzu, Very nicely explained. I appreciate the time taken and the energy of your words in reply to my post. Peace, James Thank you, James.. Be well..
|
|
|
Post by midnight on Dec 16, 2012 13:00:09 GMT -5
Well, I dunno if it was about that specifically, it was definitely about wanting to be a better person, be more confident, less hateful and angry, be more happy, etc. That's why I started reading Tolle and Maharaj and stuff like that. It was all self-improvement but I lied to myself and said I wanted 'truth' or something. I just wanted to be better than others.. more knowledgable. I thought spirituality could get me there, but bear in mind this was back in 2010 before I became depersonalised. Nowadays I don't really care about anything cos I don't feel like a self anymore. You care about not feeling like a self, which is extremely odd. It's only odd to you because you have clearly never experienced it. Everyone keeps saying that I have a self that is upset at the loss of a self, but that's really just your own projections, because for me, it does feel as if I am non-existant & not real & not present in the world as a self, particularly in my more dissociated moments when I've been on the computer for an hour or more.
|
|
|
Post by topology on Dec 16, 2012 13:02:52 GMT -5
You care about not feeling like a self, which is extremely odd. It's only odd to you because you have clearly never experienced it. Everyone keeps saying that I have a self that is upset at the loss of a self, but that's really just your own projections, because for me, it does feel as if I am non-existant & not real & not present in the world as a self, particularly in my more dissociated moments when I've been on the computer for an hour or more. If not a self, then what? What was on the computer for more than an hour in one of your more dissociated moments?
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Dec 16, 2012 14:41:06 GMT -5
Greetings.. It's only odd to you because you have clearly never experienced it. Everyone keeps saying that I have a self that is upset at the loss of a self, but that's really just your own projections, because for me, it does feel as if I am non-existant & not real & not present in the world as a self, particularly in my more dissociated moments when I've been on the computer for an hour or more. If not a self, then what? What was on the computer for more than an hour in one of your more dissociated moments? Hi Topo: First, nice to see you again.. second, i am curious about the inclination to discard 'self', what the motivation is to examine one's existence and conclude there is no 'self', or even that they are not the 'self' that does exist.. 'Self' is the tangible experiencable expression of the existence of an individual, regardless of its temporal actuality, and.. there is no conclusive evidence that the memory of each 'self' doesn't exist in a collective Cosmic memory.. so, i just look, experience, and pay attention, allow what 'is' to reveal itself.. i am very comfortable with the actuality that the Universe is not complete, it is not finished creating itself, and 'I' don't have all of the answers.. the exploration and discovery is a most wondrous experience.. Be well..
|
|
|
Post by topology on Dec 16, 2012 15:09:35 GMT -5
Greetings.. If not a self, then what? What was on the computer for more than an hour in one of your more dissociated moments? Hi Topo: First, nice to see you again.. second, i am curious about the inclination to discard 'self', what the motivation is to examine one's existence and conclude there is no 'self', or even that they are not the 'self' that does exist.. 'Self' is the tangible experiencable expression of the existence of an individual, regardless of its temporal actuality, and.. there is no conclusive evidence that the memory of each 'self' doesn't exist in a collective Cosmic memory.. so, i just look, experience, and pay attention, allow what 'is' to reveal itself.. i am very comfortable with the actuality that the Universe is not complete, it is not finished creating itself, and 'I' don't have all of the answers.. the exploration and discovery is a most wondrous experience.. Be well.. Hi Tzu, My inquiry is specific to midnight as he seems to be stuck in a form of self-loathing. He says he is in a dissociated state, absent of the feeling of having a self and yet there is something present which hates the feeling of being selfless. The question is meant to turn his attention to what is present with or without a self in these experiences. He thinks his plight is significant or special, and no one else could possibly have the same experience and not have a problem with it. He doesn't believe any of us that say we are dissociated just as he is, but we have accommodated the change in experience and the change in frame of reference. He wants help, but doesn't want help at the same time. He wants to put the genie back in the bottle, to crawl back into the womb of the illusion of being a persona and not the present awareness that is experienced in the absence of individuality and absence of the personal mental content.
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Dec 16, 2012 16:23:42 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. Hi Topo: First, nice to see you again.. second, i am curious about the inclination to discard 'self', what the motivation is to examine one's existence and conclude there is no 'self', or even that they are not the 'self' that does exist.. 'Self' is the tangible experiencable expression of the existence of an individual, regardless of its temporal actuality, and.. there is no conclusive evidence that the memory of each 'self' doesn't exist in a collective Cosmic memory.. so, i just look, experience, and pay attention, allow what 'is' to reveal itself.. i am very comfortable with the actuality that the Universe is not complete, it is not finished creating itself, and 'I' don't have all of the answers.. the exploration and discovery is a most wondrous experience.. Be well.. Hi Tzu, My inquiry is specific to midnight as he seems to be stuck in a form of self-loathing. He says he is in a dissociated state, absent of the feeling of having a self and yet there is something present which hates the feeling of being selfless. The question is meant to turn his attention to what is present with or without a self in these experiences. He thinks his plight is significant or special, and no one else could possibly have the same experience and not have a problem with it. He doesn't believe any of us that say we are dissociated just as he is, but we have accommodated the change in experience and the change in frame of reference. He wants help, but doesn't want help at the same time. He wants to put the genie back in the bottle, to crawl back into the womb of the illusion of being a persona and not the present awareness that is experienced in the absence of individuality and absence of the personal mental content. Hi Topo: My apologies for intruding into your dialogue with 'midnight'.. In your reply to me you reference the following: " the illusion of being a persona and not the present awareness that is experienced in the absence of individuality and absence of the personal mental content.".. i am not aware of anyone that exists " in the absence of individuality and absence of the personal mental content", are you aware of such people? i am aware of people that can suspend their thought processes and create a temporary experience as you describe, and i have experienced people that use that temporary experience to justify a more broadly claimed existence apart from their individuality, but.. i am still weighing the experiences of both individuality/self and no self.. so far, i understand that both are existent, and therefore neither are illusory.. mostly, i sense that we choose which perspective, self/no-self, suits our interpretation of Life unfolding.. while for me personally, there is an 'unscratched itch' pondering what it is that ponders, what it is that chooses, and why the diversity of conclusions from the presumption of a non-differentiated awareness.. Be well..
|
|
|
Post by topology on Dec 16, 2012 17:57:30 GMT -5
Greetings.. Hi Tzu, My inquiry is specific to midnight as he seems to be stuck in a form of self-loathing. He says he is in a dissociated state, absent of the feeling of having a self and yet there is something present which hates the feeling of being selfless. The question is meant to turn his attention to what is present with or without a self in these experiences. He thinks his plight is significant or special, and no one else could possibly have the same experience and not have a problem with it. He doesn't believe any of us that say we are dissociated just as he is, but we have accommodated the change in experience and the change in frame of reference. He wants help, but doesn't want help at the same time. He wants to put the genie back in the bottle, to crawl back into the womb of the illusion of being a persona and not the present awareness that is experienced in the absence of individuality and absence of the personal mental content. Hi Topo: My apologies for intruding into your dialogue with 'midnight'.. In your reply to me you reference the following: " the illusion of being a persona and not the present awareness that is experienced in the absence of individuality and absence of the personal mental content.".. i am not aware of anyone that exists " in the absence of individuality and absence of the personal mental content", are you aware of such people? i am aware of people that can suspend their thought processes and create a temporary experience as you describe, and i have experienced people that use that temporary experience to justify a more broadly claimed existence apart from their individuality, but.. i am still weighing the experiences of both individuality/self and no self.. so far, i understand that both are existent, and therefore neither are illusory.. mostly, i sense that we choose which perspective, self/no-self, suits our interpretation of Life unfolding.. while for me personally, there is an 'unscratched itch' pondering what it is that ponders, what it is that chooses, and why the diversity of conclusions from the presumption of a non-differentiated awareness.. Be well.. Hi Tzu, I don't see it so much as a choice but that we exist at an equilibrium of understanding, a harmonic of vibration if you will accommodate that description, or in other words a perspective with some degree of conditioning by the environment, linguistically, ontologically, attitudinally, etc. If you will permit me this distinction: the difference between the impersonal perspective and the personal perspective. I'm fine with the impersonal perspective being somewhat of a platonic ideal, perhaps never perfectly achieved but that one can create a qualitative measure of what is closer to being impersonal rather than personal. The fundamental difference between these two perspectives deals with how a body-mind interprets and then responds/reacts to perceived events. The impersonal perspective sees what is and responds appropriately, adding little interpretation and the response is more practical, precise and effective in general. The personal perspective personalized the events and adds unnecessary interpretation to what is happening. The personal perspective makes itself more of a victim of circumstances, this is what is happening to "me" instead of simply what is happening. The personal perspective adds emotion and drama, worrying, mind chatter, and tends to want to be in control of situations more. Most every "spiritual" practice, when taken to completion of its incremental effects, moves a person from the personal perspective to the impersonal perspective. Quieting the mind, becoming aware of one's unconscious programming, looking at one's direct and immediate experience sans mental interpretation (seeing the qualitative experience directly), mindfulness, being present and non-reactive, Love and Forgiveness, etc. These endeavors are qualitatively transformative, giving the body-mind the opportunity to see clearly and then perhaps realize the truth of the way things are instead of how they are imagined to be. While it is true that we seem to be having individuated experiences, I can't see out your eyes and you can't see out mine, we are still having universal experiences. This can be seen best if we were to stand next to each other in view of the same vista. As you and I look out upon the same view and if we let our minds go quiet, there is more sameness to our experience than difference. With the absence of the personal mind-story which anchors our thinking that we are a person named so-and-so, we can see and realize that we could have been anybody. With the mind quieted we realize our sameness. The consciousness here, the presence, awareness, clarity, it is the same with minor variations in emotion, mental content, and body manifestation. As one continues with these "spiritual" practices, the self-identification shifts from being centered around the story details stored in the body-mind's memory to being centered around these universal qualities. As the attention and orientation shifts towards the impersonal and the universal, the story-content tends to fall away as the details become unimportant, happenstance, and with little significance. As the orientation normalizes through abiding in the clarity of direct experience and the mind normalizes in quietude, even the story of having made the the thoughts around the process of shifting tend to fall away and lose their significance. One simply acclimates and gets used to living from the impersonal perspective. The life of the personal self is lived purely in imagination as a coloring of the experience as it is interpreted by the mind. The mind has been habituated to a few confirmation biases where it uses the existence of Y in the experience to conclude that Z is true. "people call this body so-and-so, so therefore I exist as so-and-so." this kind of subtle buy-in to the story is very hard to doubt and when initially doubted it plunges the mind's identification process into existential crisis. If I am not this persona, not the past events, not my thoughts, then who or what am I?!? Anything at all? But this is just the mind in its panic, the death throws of the identification with the personal. There are many many people that live in this impersonal perspective. I think most don't even realize it because they haven't thought about the differences significantly. They just live without making a big fuss or taking things personally. From the outside they look like a grounded human being, from the inside they are just present and aware in every situation without thinking about needing to be present and aware. Then there are those of us who have had to resort to philosophy and spirituality to cope with our personal obsessions and that has brought us to the impersonal perspective. In a nutshell it is simply practical living, wisdom in expression, clarity of Mind and emotion in response. But it is impersonal and without reflective or self-obsessed thought or interpretation.
|
|
|
Post by sharon on Dec 16, 2012 18:48:22 GMT -5
There are many many people that live in this impersonal perspective. I think most don't even realize it because they haven't thought about the differences significantly. They just live without making a big fuss or taking things personally. From the outside they look like a grounded human being, from the inside they are just present and aware in every situation without thinking about needing to be present and aware. True observation.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 16, 2012 19:03:06 GMT -5
You care about not feeling like a self, which is extremely odd. It's only odd to you because you have clearly never experienced it. Everyone keeps saying that I have a self that is upset at the loss of a self, but that's really just your own projections, because for me, it does feel as if I am non-existant & not real & not present in the world as a self, particularly in my more dissociated moments when I've been on the computer for an hour or more. It's a story you're telling yourself. How can you sit there and declare you don't exist? You may not know what you are, but obviously you exist. If you don't exist, the issue of whether or not that nonexistent thingy is upset will never arise at all.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 16, 2012 19:17:27 GMT -5
It's only odd to you because you have clearly never experienced it. Everyone keeps saying that I have a self that is upset at the loss of a self, but that's really just your own projections, because for me, it does feel as if I am non-existant & not real & not present in the world as a self, particularly in my more dissociated moments when I've been on the computer for an hour or more. It's a story you're telling yourself. How can you sit there and declare you don't exist? You may not know what you are, but obviously you exist. If you don't exist, the issue of whether or not that nonexistent thingy is upset will never arise at all. Patrick, I 2nd enigma on this. If you want I can link you to a post where enigma goes into a bit more detail about what he means by "exist".
|
|
|
Post by midnight on Dec 16, 2012 19:33:19 GMT -5
Greetings.. Hi Topo: First, nice to see you again.. second, i am curious about the inclination to discard 'self', what the motivation is to examine one's existence and conclude there is no 'self', or even that they are not the 'self' that does exist.. 'Self' is the tangible experiencable expression of the existence of an individual, regardless of its temporal actuality, and.. there is no conclusive evidence that the memory of each 'self' doesn't exist in a collective Cosmic memory.. so, i just look, experience, and pay attention, allow what 'is' to reveal itself.. i am very comfortable with the actuality that the Universe is not complete, it is not finished creating itself, and 'I' don't have all of the answers.. the exploration and discovery is a most wondrous experience.. Be well.. Hi Tzu, My inquiry is specific to midnight as he seems to be stuck in a form of self-loathing. He says he is in a dissociated state, absent of the feeling of having a self and yet there is something present which hates the feeling of being selfless. The question is meant to turn his attention to what is present with or without a self in these experiences. He thinks his plight is significant or special, and no one else could possibly have the same experience and not have a problem with it. He doesn't believe any of us that say we are dissociated just as he is, but we have accommodated the change in experience and the change in frame of reference. He wants help, but doesn't want help at the same time. He wants to put the genie back in the bottle, to crawl back into the womb of the illusion of being a persona and not the present awareness that is experienced in the absence of individuality and absence of the personal mental content. I don't think my plight is particularly significant in the greater scheme of things any more Topology, I can assure you of that. I definitely did used to think what I was experiencing was really special, but now I see it as an immense inconvenience, still pretty scary, though not mystical anymore (even though some of the symptoms are so bizarre I can't believe this isn't a 'dark night of the soul' still.) Not many on here could possibly be dissociated in the same way, because otherwise there would be many more threads on the forum with people complaining of feeling acute anxiety, panic, dread etc. So here's the thing, I believe that many people here have experienced dissociation or are experiencing it now, but not in the way that it becomes a problem that disrupts their lives, like it has for my life.That's a more fair perspective. Does that make sense? Yeah, I definitely am stuck in self-loathing, it's almost like my mind is trying to block out the pain of intense self-hatred. Good observation. I am not sure how to remedy this self-loathing part though, therapy doesn't seem to get to the root of it, though I have been trying.
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Dec 16, 2012 19:46:47 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. Hi Topo: My apologies for intruding into your dialogue with 'midnight'.. In your reply to me you reference the following: " the illusion of being a persona and not the present awareness that is experienced in the absence of individuality and absence of the personal mental content.".. i am not aware of anyone that exists " in the absence of individuality and absence of the personal mental content", are you aware of such people? i am aware of people that can suspend their thought processes and create a temporary experience as you describe, and i have experienced people that use that temporary experience to justify a more broadly claimed existence apart from their individuality, but.. i am still weighing the experiences of both individuality/self and no self.. so far, i understand that both are existent, and therefore neither are illusory.. mostly, i sense that we choose which perspective, self/no-self, suits our interpretation of Life unfolding.. while for me personally, there is an 'unscratched itch' pondering what it is that ponders, what it is that chooses, and why the diversity of conclusions from the presumption of a non-differentiated awareness.. Be well.. Hi Tzu, I don't see it so much as a choice but that we exist at an equilibrium of understanding, a harmonic of vibration if you will accommodate that description, or in other words a perspective with some degree of conditioning by the environment, linguistically, ontologically, attitudinally, etc. If you will permit me this distinction: the difference between the impersonal perspective and the personal perspective. I'm fine with the impersonal perspective being somewhat of a platonic ideal, perhaps never perfectly achieved but that one can create a qualitative measure of what is closer to being impersonal rather than personal. The fundamental difference between these two perspectives deals with how a body-mind interprets and then responds/reacts to perceived events. The impersonal perspective sees what is and responds appropriately, adding little interpretation and the response is more practical, precise and effective in general. The personal perspective personalized the events and adds unnecessary interpretation to what is happening. The personal perspective makes itself more of a victim of circumstances, this is what is happening to "me" instead of simply what is happening. The personal perspective adds emotion and drama, worrying, mind chatter, and tends to want to be in control of situations more. Most every "spiritual" practice, when taken to completion of its incremental effects, moves a person from the personal perspective to the impersonal perspective. Quieting the mind, becoming aware of one's unconscious programming, looking at one's direct and immediate experience sans mental interpretation (seeing the qualitative experience directly), mindfulness, being present and non-reactive, Love and Forgiveness, etc. These endeavors are qualitatively transformative, giving the body-mind the opportunity to see clearly and then perhaps realize the truth of the way things are instead of how they are imagined to be. While it is true that we seem to be having individuated experiences, I can't see out your eyes and you can't see out mine, we are still having universal experiences. This can be seen best if we were to stand next to each other in view of the same vista. As you and I look out upon the same view and if we let our minds go quiet, there is more sameness to our experience than difference. With the absence of the personal mind-story which anchors our thinking that we are a person named so-and-so, we can see and realize that we could have been anybody. With the mind quieted we realize our sameness. The consciousness here, the presence, awareness, clarity, it is the same with minor variations in emotion, mental content, and body manifestation. As one continues with these "spiritual" practices, the self-identification shifts from being centered around the story details stored in the body-mind's memory to being centered around these universal qualities. As the attention and orientation shifts towards the impersonal and the universal, the story-content tends to fall away as the details become unimportant, happenstance, and with little significance. As the orientation normalizes through abiding in the clarity of direct experience and the mind normalizes in quietude, even the story of having made the the thoughts around the process of shifting tend to fall away and lose their significance. One simply acclimates and gets used to living from the impersonal perspective. The life of the personal self is lived purely in imagination as a coloring of the experience as it is interpreted by the mind. The mind has been habituated to a few confirmation biases where it uses the existence of Y in the experience to conclude that Z is true. "people call this body so-and-so, so therefore I exist as so-and-so." this kind of subtle buy-in to the story is very hard to doubt and when initially doubted it plunges the mind's identification process into existential crisis. If I am not this persona, not the past events, not my thoughts, then who or what am I?!? Anything at all? But this is just the mind in its panic, the death throws of the identification with the personal. There are many many people that live in this impersonal perspective. I think most don't even realize it because they haven't thought about the differences significantly. They just live without making a big fuss or taking things personally. From the outside they look like a grounded human being, from the inside they are just present and aware in every situation without thinking about needing to be present and aware. Then there are those of us who have had to resort to philosophy and spirituality to cope with our personal obsessions and that has brought us to the impersonal perspective. In a nutshell it is simply practical living, wisdom in expression, clarity of Mind and emotion in response. But it is impersonal and without reflective or self-obsessed thought or interpretation. Hi Topo: Bravo!! A very insightful description of existence from the 'still mind' perspective.. we may differ in our understandings of the usefulness of Living in one perspective or another, but.. your description is so well crafted as to give me pause for contemplation and absorption, yeah.. it's that good.. I find myself drifting between universal and individual, allowing the demands of 'Now' to inspire the perspective, favoring neither, personally.. thanks for the excellent read, Topo.. Be well..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2012 19:48:13 GMT -5
a problem that disrupts their lives, like it has for my lifehmmm. so much for dissociative sounds like an over-active imagination "want your cake and eat it too" is a common problem in this business
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 16, 2012 19:56:17 GMT -5
It's only odd to you because you have clearly never experienced it. Everyone keeps saying that I have a self that is upset at the loss of a self, but that's really just your own projections, because for me, it does feel as if I am non-existant & not real & not present in the world as a self, particularly in my more dissociated moments when I've been on the computer for an hour or more. It's a story you're telling yourself. How can you sit there and declare you don't exist? You may not know what you are, but obviously you exist. If you don't exist, the issue of whether or not that nonexistent thingy is upset will never arise at all. And to re-iterate this Midnight, what enigma is referring to isn't even dependent on your subjective experience. I for one am more than willing to consider the possibility that you've come face-to-face with some type of void that scared the sh!t out of you that I've never even been close to. What enigma is referring to is a common baseline, the same common baseline that kiki talks about all the time. Really man, I'm not trying to sound pushy or rude here at all ... don't read these next words with that tone at all, ok? To say that you feel self-loathing but to deny that you are rather than that you are not is a mind game that's being played ... I've heard you when you say you can't feel that sense of localized self that is playing that game, I'm just telling you that the game is being played nontheless. It's your game, so I don't know the rules, so I can't help you out other that to tell you it's running, but I can tell you that here's no other explanation other than you are essentially fooling yourself. There is no shame in that. It's not a negative thing at all. I'm not trying to sell you on the idea that you're just like everyone else, because I simply don't know man ... it does sound to me as if no, you are not like everyone else with this type of mind game playing out ... but what I'm telling you about your basic being, what enigma is telling you about the basic fact on the ground that you exist, that's undeniable. Go ask kiki and he'll tell you exactly the same thing. As a matter of fact I'm pretty sure he did at least once already kid. No judgments ... if you run that same 'ole algo in your head and tell me that I don't understand 'cause I never been there, you're forgiven up front, ok?
|
|