Mind Twister for no one.
Still searching for that bright insight? - Maybe you are overlooking some very basic facts.
The fact that you are looking for ‘something special’ and possibly feel a lack of ‘it’ is the apparent problem.
There is NO problem.
Who is looking? - And for what?
A phenomenal object cannot find its own source because that source for it is nothing. - No thing.
Now, that may mean something to you. - However, that function of knowing, understanding or seeing is actually beyond the instrument that it ‘appears’ in.
Or does the instrument itself 'appear' in that spaceous knowing presence?
The mind pattern called a 'seeker' can never ‘get fulfilled’ because it can never acquire what it seeks. - What it seeks is its own Antithesis. - Do the polar opposites of mind appear to play a game of hide and seek?
Is there a difference between knowing that and not knowing that? - And for whom?
Beyond the polaric 'knowing' and the 'not knowing', is that knowing essence, which never starts or ends.
Whatever circumstances you believe you are ‘in’, are they not 'perfection’ just as 'it is'. - 'Who' has a problem?
- Neither right nor wrong, don't they simply 'appear' as the ever changing dance of right and wrong, for the mind? - Is it not obviously so?
- There is no 'separate entity' that observes this or anything and yet seeing is happening in that empty space of cognition. -We can call it pure cognition but that implies that there is something that is not pure outside of it.
Zero degrees of separation.
To perceive a problem is to take on board that there is a problem, even though it has no existence at all, except as a time/space pattern in the appearance of 'things'.
As long as you seek the company of so-called enlightened souls, you will continue to ignore the light that shines forth from the source that you ARE.
There is only One source.
which ‘appears’ as this universe and so expresses itself as everything perceivable and imaginable and at the same ‘time’ in what I call the ‘first instant’ (the only instant of now) it is empty of, and beyond, all words. - It is Oneness or the true nature of awareness.
How does one demonstrate Oneness? -How can one show, to a seeming ‘other’ it’s (this other’s) own true nature? - Or it’s own? -Isn’t it One and the same?
Where is the need to show or reveal and to whom?
The so-called ‘need’ can only be in the mind, because one’s ‘true nature’ is already true and naturally in need of nothing, nothing ‘more or less’ of anything at all.
How can a seemingly ‘different point of perception’ of another – an ‘other’, merge with ‘this’ (the explainer), a different ‘point’, and so reach agreement by eliminating the apparent separation through words? -It is ‘word’ that has seemingly brought about the separation or at least the sense of separation.
- Do ‘you’ detect the apparent paradox? - Where is the paradox except in the mind, via conflicting concepts or paradigms?
We apparently need points of reference before any thought framework can appear.
This, as well as what is written here, is of course all conceptual by its nature.
We may feel that we can’t communicate all that well without concepts.
Is there such a thing as communication happening? - (Good question but annoying for the intellect.)
Do ‘concepts’ limit the nature of ‘things’?
The words ‘sky’ is not engraved in big letters on that blueness above.
In fact the word ‘sky’ appeared long ‘after’ the sky itself appeared, in relative terms and in the ordinary way of general consensus reality.
Reality is not confined by words at all. -Reality is neither enhanced, nor limited by words. - Thoughtless reality is obvious, yet we rarely appreciate that fact.
Oneness. - What can we say about it? - Like a ripple on the shores edge, what effect can it have on the ocean? - One must imagine it as being separate from the ocean in some way, before we can entertain the concept that that ripple could ever have an effect on the ocean. -It is the ocean – water. - Or if one wants to be scientific, one could say that the ripple is an energy pattern flowing through the water.
The pulse of life is flowing through that body of yours right now. - Is there a separation between the apparent two?
The universe is like one molecule, which appears to contain all molecules. - The universe is one point, which contains all points.
Am I getting through? - Is there communication? - Is there a subtle stimulation?
Or is it already known? - What knows? - Is it a form, a personality that knows?
Whatever you believe about that, there is an expression flowing out here and this may register well with you or not so well. - Some may even think that I am waffling on about a bunch of nonsense. - No problem here about any of it.
One thing that I am totally sure of is this: - Cognition is happening (with you) and this is actually prior to any conditioning that you may believe that you have. - It is also prior to anything in memory or acquired mind (all you have learned – personalized knowledge).
Now, the point may not be appreciated (by you) and it most probably may be a point of contrition. - Bear with me, if you will.
All of our senses, hearing, tasting etc. are indivisible at the ‘point’ of perception (or cognition).
How do you differ from that point of cognition? - Are you not that?
If not, what could you be?
We cannot deny that hearing is different from seeing but is it true at the ‘point’ of cognition?
In that pure space of cognition, we cannot divide anything and seeing and hearing are of one essence.
Now, this is extremely significant in no uncertain way. - Or is it? - You tell me.
From the point of view of mind, it is significant, if it is not recognized clearly.
It is only in ‘mind process’ that any argument about this can take place.
Recognize this fact: - Any such argument (or agreement) is registering with the ‘point’ of cognition. - In fact, everything is registering there with equal measure (although, I imagine, few would agree).
Well, I have referred to that place of cognition as being a ‘point’.
In fact it has no known dimensions at all. - It is beyond the known (because it is the ‘knowing’).
A ‘point’ is zero dimensions. -Insubstantial.
Even though it is insubstantial and has no known dimension, it contains the whole universe. - There is no ‘time’ that can be applied to it because it contains all time.
What I am saying is so obvious, we have, most probably, not even given it a thought.
So, where does all this lead us? - Nowhere at all.
You are present and aware in That and AS That.
Recognize that it is true. - To deny this pure ‘point’ of cognition is really just divergent indulgence and that will go around and around endlessly, with no escape, for that apparent individual.
If you are drowning and someone throws you a rope, you take hold of it and so you are pulled out of the rough seas (of confused mind).
Our true identity is not limited by what the mind throws up, although it seems that it is, for the identified ‘form’ called ‘me’.
Now, I realize that what I have expressed here may well have missed the mark for many, possible, readers.
I must say without being rude, it is not my problem. - I have dealt with what we term as the ‘conditioned mind’. - Whatever condition that you believe you have, is not my doing. - You must deal with it yourself. - To say such things may appear to be rather blunt or even arrogant but that is not my intention. - The sensitive ‘ego’ will not survive that death of the body but if the ‘ground’ that it appears to reside on is totally revealed to be non existent before that ‘death’, then death can’t touch that which remains as the natural state, presence awareness.
However you perceive or translate what I am saying, it is not my intention to add data for any conditioned mind to immerse itself in. - The impulse is to point to that open space of cognition.
A road sign may say “ London ”, “ Paris ” or “Timbucktoo”. - The place it is pointing to is not confined to the sign. - It merely points the direction to go in.
(If you want to go to that place).
With this ‘pointing’ you don’t even have to take one step because you are that space of cognition.
Now, this space cannot be divided by any thought, concept or state of affairs.
Thought, concepts, states and conditions can only appear in it.
This clear space is actually unchanging.
It is the nature of all that appears in it, to change. - The content of awareness is changeful. - Awareness is timeless and unchanging. - That which appears is forever changing and that is the nature of energy – moving patterns of seeming solid, substantial or subtle matter.
Yesterday’s mood is gone. - You are not that. - Yesterday’s identified states are gone. - You are not those. - The thought that appears right now is not what you are.
You are the source of that light by which you see and know all ‘things’.
Can you say that you are anything ‘more’ than that?
‘Who’ emerges out of that ‘pure’ space of knowing and ‘who’ is it that gets lost in phenomena?
‘Who’ could answer such a question?
- Merry Christmas. 2006
The fact that you are looking for ‘something special’ and possibly feel a lack of ‘it’ is the apparent problem.
There is NO problem.
Who is looking? - And for what?
A phenomenal object cannot find its own source because that source for it is nothing. - No thing.
Now, that may mean something to you. - However, that function of knowing, understanding or seeing is actually beyond the instrument that it ‘appears’ in.
Or does the instrument itself 'appear' in that spaceous knowing presence?
The mind pattern called a 'seeker' can never ‘get fulfilled’ because it can never acquire what it seeks. - What it seeks is its own Antithesis. - Do the polar opposites of mind appear to play a game of hide and seek?
Is there a difference between knowing that and not knowing that? - And for whom?
Beyond the polaric 'knowing' and the 'not knowing', is that knowing essence, which never starts or ends.
Whatever circumstances you believe you are ‘in’, are they not 'perfection’ just as 'it is'. - 'Who' has a problem?
- Neither right nor wrong, don't they simply 'appear' as the ever changing dance of right and wrong, for the mind? - Is it not obviously so?
- There is no 'separate entity' that observes this or anything and yet seeing is happening in that empty space of cognition. -We can call it pure cognition but that implies that there is something that is not pure outside of it.
Zero degrees of separation.
To perceive a problem is to take on board that there is a problem, even though it has no existence at all, except as a time/space pattern in the appearance of 'things'.
As long as you seek the company of so-called enlightened souls, you will continue to ignore the light that shines forth from the source that you ARE.
There is only One source.
which ‘appears’ as this universe and so expresses itself as everything perceivable and imaginable and at the same ‘time’ in what I call the ‘first instant’ (the only instant of now) it is empty of, and beyond, all words. - It is Oneness or the true nature of awareness.
How does one demonstrate Oneness? -How can one show, to a seeming ‘other’ it’s (this other’s) own true nature? - Or it’s own? -Isn’t it One and the same?
Where is the need to show or reveal and to whom?
The so-called ‘need’ can only be in the mind, because one’s ‘true nature’ is already true and naturally in need of nothing, nothing ‘more or less’ of anything at all.
How can a seemingly ‘different point of perception’ of another – an ‘other’, merge with ‘this’ (the explainer), a different ‘point’, and so reach agreement by eliminating the apparent separation through words? -It is ‘word’ that has seemingly brought about the separation or at least the sense of separation.
- Do ‘you’ detect the apparent paradox? - Where is the paradox except in the mind, via conflicting concepts or paradigms?
We apparently need points of reference before any thought framework can appear.
This, as well as what is written here, is of course all conceptual by its nature.
We may feel that we can’t communicate all that well without concepts.
Is there such a thing as communication happening? - (Good question but annoying for the intellect.)
Do ‘concepts’ limit the nature of ‘things’?
The words ‘sky’ is not engraved in big letters on that blueness above.
In fact the word ‘sky’ appeared long ‘after’ the sky itself appeared, in relative terms and in the ordinary way of general consensus reality.
Reality is not confined by words at all. -Reality is neither enhanced, nor limited by words. - Thoughtless reality is obvious, yet we rarely appreciate that fact.
Oneness. - What can we say about it? - Like a ripple on the shores edge, what effect can it have on the ocean? - One must imagine it as being separate from the ocean in some way, before we can entertain the concept that that ripple could ever have an effect on the ocean. -It is the ocean – water. - Or if one wants to be scientific, one could say that the ripple is an energy pattern flowing through the water.
The pulse of life is flowing through that body of yours right now. - Is there a separation between the apparent two?
The universe is like one molecule, which appears to contain all molecules. - The universe is one point, which contains all points.
Am I getting through? - Is there communication? - Is there a subtle stimulation?
Or is it already known? - What knows? - Is it a form, a personality that knows?
Whatever you believe about that, there is an expression flowing out here and this may register well with you or not so well. - Some may even think that I am waffling on about a bunch of nonsense. - No problem here about any of it.
One thing that I am totally sure of is this: - Cognition is happening (with you) and this is actually prior to any conditioning that you may believe that you have. - It is also prior to anything in memory or acquired mind (all you have learned – personalized knowledge).
Now, the point may not be appreciated (by you) and it most probably may be a point of contrition. - Bear with me, if you will.
All of our senses, hearing, tasting etc. are indivisible at the ‘point’ of perception (or cognition).
How do you differ from that point of cognition? - Are you not that?
If not, what could you be?
We cannot deny that hearing is different from seeing but is it true at the ‘point’ of cognition?
In that pure space of cognition, we cannot divide anything and seeing and hearing are of one essence.
Now, this is extremely significant in no uncertain way. - Or is it? - You tell me.
From the point of view of mind, it is significant, if it is not recognized clearly.
It is only in ‘mind process’ that any argument about this can take place.
Recognize this fact: - Any such argument (or agreement) is registering with the ‘point’ of cognition. - In fact, everything is registering there with equal measure (although, I imagine, few would agree).
Well, I have referred to that place of cognition as being a ‘point’.
In fact it has no known dimensions at all. - It is beyond the known (because it is the ‘knowing’).
A ‘point’ is zero dimensions. -Insubstantial.
Even though it is insubstantial and has no known dimension, it contains the whole universe. - There is no ‘time’ that can be applied to it because it contains all time.
What I am saying is so obvious, we have, most probably, not even given it a thought.
So, where does all this lead us? - Nowhere at all.
You are present and aware in That and AS That.
Recognize that it is true. - To deny this pure ‘point’ of cognition is really just divergent indulgence and that will go around and around endlessly, with no escape, for that apparent individual.
If you are drowning and someone throws you a rope, you take hold of it and so you are pulled out of the rough seas (of confused mind).
Our true identity is not limited by what the mind throws up, although it seems that it is, for the identified ‘form’ called ‘me’.
Now, I realize that what I have expressed here may well have missed the mark for many, possible, readers.
I must say without being rude, it is not my problem. - I have dealt with what we term as the ‘conditioned mind’. - Whatever condition that you believe you have, is not my doing. - You must deal with it yourself. - To say such things may appear to be rather blunt or even arrogant but that is not my intention. - The sensitive ‘ego’ will not survive that death of the body but if the ‘ground’ that it appears to reside on is totally revealed to be non existent before that ‘death’, then death can’t touch that which remains as the natural state, presence awareness.
However you perceive or translate what I am saying, it is not my intention to add data for any conditioned mind to immerse itself in. - The impulse is to point to that open space of cognition.
A road sign may say “ London ”, “ Paris ” or “Timbucktoo”. - The place it is pointing to is not confined to the sign. - It merely points the direction to go in.
(If you want to go to that place).
With this ‘pointing’ you don’t even have to take one step because you are that space of cognition.
Now, this space cannot be divided by any thought, concept or state of affairs.
Thought, concepts, states and conditions can only appear in it.
This clear space is actually unchanging.
It is the nature of all that appears in it, to change. - The content of awareness is changeful. - Awareness is timeless and unchanging. - That which appears is forever changing and that is the nature of energy – moving patterns of seeming solid, substantial or subtle matter.
Yesterday’s mood is gone. - You are not that. - Yesterday’s identified states are gone. - You are not those. - The thought that appears right now is not what you are.
You are the source of that light by which you see and know all ‘things’.
Can you say that you are anything ‘more’ than that?
‘Who’ emerges out of that ‘pure’ space of knowing and ‘who’ is it that gets lost in phenomena?
‘Who’ could answer such a question?
- Merry Christmas. 2006
<< Home