An excellent (although, by virtue of being conceptual, an imperfect) funny analogy for what it means to see through a false idea to then allow the Truth to shine through/present;
That statement itself is false. It just doesn't happen like that and you will never hear any sage say that.
They will say something similar but it doesn't mean what you think it means.
And you know what I think it means? By what means? How do you know for certain that I am not saying what the they are saying? I know you WANT to believe I am not saying the same, as that's the story you're caught up in..but can you really know that by words alone on a screen?
Precisely. And 'delusion' itself, is completely in that world of the relative. What is delusion/illusion other than 'an erroneous idea/belief'?
Yes. And while the seeing/realization of "unboundedness/unlimited-ness/freedom" is non-conceptual, that which obscures that, IS entirely conceptual. Separation is more than just a mere, singular idea. It's an entire structure of ideation...involves patterns of nuanced thought. That said, as a conglomerate, 'separation' is a concept. And it is that concept that must be seen through, (that ultimately goes poof) in SR.
Unfortunately, that seeing/realization is obscured when the concept of separation is in play. I agree though, SR is more than merely seeing through a particular concept....that seeing through requires a complete shift in locus of seeing....FROM the seeming limited eyes of a person, TO 'beyond.'
And if SR abides, that shift is more than a mere split-second, temporary gleaning, rather, that shift in locus of seeing, abides...that's where the primary 'locus' of seeing now happens from...unbounded beyond.
Surely though you understand that it's one thing for the Truth to always BE the Truth....always shining, and then quite another for that to be "unveiled/realized"?
Try telling the suffering seeker that the Truth is shining through. I'm sure that'll do it.
What needs to happen for the suffering & seeking to end, is for the erroneous mistake of taking himself to be "a seeker/person/separate entity" to be seen through. And like it or not, the 'separate entity' is nothing more than an erroneous concept...erroneous conglomeration/structure of ideation.
This is where you argument goes wrong Satchi. This is faulty reasoning based on your misunderstanding. Just because that which is obscuring the Truth Is a concept, does not mean that the Truth shining through, is itself a concept.
The seeing through of the conceptual structure that = imagined separation, does not = 'the thought' that 'there is no separation.' It really is a seeing through/absence.
You have mistaken 'seeing through of the concept of separation,' with the adoption of a new thought that replaces it, that THEN clears the way for Truth the shine through.
That is not what I am suggesting at all. Rather, I am saying in the seeing through of the concept of separation, in that
absence, the Truth shines through. That is very different than saying that in the seeing through of the separation concept, a new idea enters in that says: There is no separation, and that that then, is what pulls off the veil and illuminates the Truth.
It is this erroneous interpretation of yours, regarding my words that has been at the crux of far too many of your posts. Please read what I say above, carefully and slowly...I hope this time you get it.
Being would be obviously known, if not for the erroneous concept of separation...if not for full immersion and capture, within the limited vantage point of personhood.
Obviously there is something standing in the way of realizing unbounded-ness, or it would be realized for all.
If/when that happens, they've erroneously conceptualized the pointer of "emptiness." I've never said that seeing through the illusion of separation means the end of the experience of a personality, of a world, in all it's glory...so not sure why you're asserting this as though you have to convince me of it. You're preaching to the choir with that one.
Sure, there is the conceptual knowledge, the mind-informed counterpart to the non-conceptual realization of Self, however, if that's ALL there is, we're not talking actual SR....just a sort of 'mind-enlightenment,' and not the real deal. Absent the shift in locus of seeing...absent the non-conceptual apprehension, it's plain and simply not 'awakening/SR.'
That can be directly, non-conceptually realized if/when the conceptual blinders come off. Never mind what so called "non-duality" says...never mind what another poster has said or said. That absence has been clearly realized. There is no existent/actual 'someone' who is 'experiencing.' The sense of 'experiencing as an experiencer' is itself an experience.
Again, yes, the Truth is beyond all ideas and concepts. That does not mean though. that that which obscures it is not a concept. That's what the term delusion/illusion references. You are applying faulty logic here, that's all.
If you don't agree that it's a false concept that obscures the Truth, then what do you make of the term 'delusion/illusion' What is that if not a false concept/structure of ideation?
I am not saying it is!!
The 'seeing through' of the concept of separation, is not 'an intellectual understanding.' It really is a seeing through that leaves the absence of that idea in it's wake. An absence that is not 'replaced' by another concept. It remains an absence.