In the Dream vs. Beyond the Dream

...just a tad funny that 2 dudes that supposedly had such little interest in and wanted so little to do with Figgle's pov, and found her questions so annoying, felt the need to kick her off the forum, now feel the need to revert back to address & talk about Figgle's pov.

Why not buck up and come on over & have an actual discussion...?



Wrong. I'm well aware that mystical/woo-woo experience can indeed occur in tandem with "realization." My point has always been though that when that happens, more often than not, (you and ZD exemplifying such) the two become entangled; Mind hi-jacks the "realization" which is always a loss/seeing through and mixes it up with the perceivable/experiential content of the woo-woo experience.

The woo-woo/experiential component is just mind intervening where it has no business going.

When the woo-woo is NOT erroneously conflated with the seeing through/realization of no separation/Oneness, there is SR, and the woo-woo experience is seen for what it is, (still perhaps, an awe-inspiring, beautiful and amazing experience, but not Truth) but when it is conflated, as you demonstrate, the locus of seeing is still mired within the dream, but with the erroneous belief that it is not. What we have then is a (s)elf identified person, merely 'thinking' he's no longer a separate person vs. the actual absence of the mistake/falsity of separation.

Mind is incredibly sneaky that way. More often than not, where there's a special experience in tandem with seeing through, it hi-jacks the absence/seeing through and turns it into 'something'....an addition of new knowledge vs. a loss/absence. Far better then when seeing through of separation doesn't occur in tandem with woo-woo.

Look back at ZD's numerous sharings of his CC stories. He admits to chasing after the woo-woo high, trying to replicate it because it was so awe-inspiring.

SR/The shift in locus of seeing only happens when there is an absence...when there is no longer identification with 'something,' in play.



That's what you are doing in denoting the experience as 'realization'! Realization has no added new content/knowledge....it is a seeing through/loss subtraction. When the entity that was believed to be the locus of seeing is seen through, there is a shift in seeing from that imagined locus, to beyond.

Anything new in terms of knowledge that is gained in that is as mind is informed relative to that shift/seeing through/absence.



What you are positing is that you come away from that direct experience of all phenomenal things as alive, conscious, experiencing, perceiving, with 'recall' of that woo-woo experience, which means your suitcase now contains new knowledge based on the memory of that past event.

That's NOT "realization."




If it's an addition of something known...additional knowledge/baggage vs. a seeing through/absence, then it can and does indeed at various times, go 'unseen.'

SR is not about taking on new knowledge as to define what you are, it's about the seeing through of previous false ideas about what you are. It's entirely non-conceptual...we can only then point when speaking of 'what I really am....what actually exists.'




But it was YOU who said that SR is "incomplete" absent Kensho/CC that leaves one with positive knowledge 'about' the appearing world....(the knowing that even shoe and socks are alive, conscious, perceiving, experiencing.)

Again, you used to be completely on board with what I am now saying. What happened?

This is where you go wrong. The "distinction" between perceivables/experiential vs. the abiding ground cannot be denied. Nor does it need to be. What is absolute is Oneness....absence of separation between arising/appearing/distinction vs. the ground which upon it arises.

That undeniable distinction between appearance/perceivable vs. the unwaving ground within/to which they arise, is precisely what Niz is alluding to when he uses the pointer "All perceivables are stains."

This is also what 'there are no bridges between the in the dream vs. seeing from beyond' means.

To truly realize there is no separation, identification with the phenomenal must end. In that, the distinction between phenomenal vs. that which abides, must be clearly seen/realized. This is what it means to see the phenomenal as 'empty appearance only.'





The "realization/seeing through/absence" does not happen in mind, but the informing of mind, the conceptualization, ability to talk and point to the Truth, obviously, does.




The "Self" includes all of it, but realization of "Self" means the absence of identification with even the most subtle of experience.

I'm actually surprised you'd say that. What does that mean...the relative, 'appearance' is not 'inclusive of' "________________" relative to the pointer "there is only One"...?








The absolute/fundamental abiding ground "abides" all relative appearance. Relative appearance does not need to disappear to realize that ground.

Seeing the material world as "empty appearance only" is more than enough...no need for the appearing world to cease to appear.

Freedom from the world is not contingent upon a denial of the appearing world...nor the cessation of an appearing world. Waking up to dream does not mean the end of the appearing dream.




Appearances are not illusions. Separation is an illusion. It does not actually 'appear,' in experience....in form, nor in circumstance... folks just erroneously mistakingly, 'think' it does.

It's not an either/or thing. So long as Attention (not "On" but AS "Self") is predominant, thoughts, sensations, the entire gamut of worldly appearance, can and will continue to capture 'some' of that attention, without obscuring freedom.