What is an appropriate relationship to those people...

What is an appropriate relationship to those people whose world view is very different to mine ?
i can say that i don't even know myself very well, so how is it possible to have even the slightest knowledge of anyone else ?
Am talking about everybody else ?
There are some people who share some attitudes with me, but nobody who does one hundred percent.
If i ask myself "where did the question come from?", i get an image of a particular person.
i know this person a bit. i have experienced them in their private lives and know them to be a nice and good  person. Their interests are very distant to mine, they see the world so differently that i have no confidence that anything i say will be interpreted in the spirit, or with the meaning that was intended.
And so, here is the answer to my question. A benign indifference might be appropriate except for needed contact and navigating through necessary interaction.
An all important aspect of this is the experience of equanimity.

Looking directly...

"You just need to look directly without expectations or assumptions."

i just can't get it !
i "look directly" by asking myself "where is the I?"
i watch my thoughts, how they come, whether they include expectations or assumptions, i watch my thought reactions to those thoughts and the feeling reactions. 

i can't find an I.
i understand that there is no I.

i believe that there is no I.
i grok that there is no I.
But still i want to be different to the way i am. i want to experience Oneness.
i understand that this wanting is still wanting to be a me (albeit an improved me.)

i understand that there is nothing i can do to change this. 

Nothing can facilitate the 'shift' from believing that there is no I, to experiencing that there is no I to experience that there is no I.

Does Truth matter to me?

Does Truth matter to me?
If my experience is just that, my experience, and my reaction to that is what it is, how does it matter if there was Truth somehow involved?
Believing that Truth was part of my experience could certainly enhance my experience, but that is an overlay applied by my mind and of zero value in my intention to relate to 'what is'.
I think Truth is only conceptual, whereas i seek to interact with the actual. 
Emotion clouds. Emotion is always preceded by thinking.
Thinking leads to perceptual ineptitude.
If I mistake a piece of rope for a snake, Truth is that it is not a snake. Truth is I reacted to a snake. Truth is that Truth is inconsequential to my experience. (Though perhaps it is Truth that makes it a peculiarly human experience??)

Truth - revisited...

Socrates taught us not accept our existing thoughts as true. Step back and reevaluate the truth and veracity of your opinions and beliefs. Seek to know your real self and seek truth.With this in mind I will here undertake a verbal/thought journey of self discovery by asking the question “What is a Truth?”

I won't be seeking to perform an intellectual exercise but rather to discover what my current beliefs are about truth and how my daily life is affected by those beliefs.

“What is a Truth? Is it a thing, separate and definable? Can it change?”

If I accept the premise that truth exists as something separate and definable, then I have to do something (focus) to experience it or stop doing something that stops me seeing it (e.g. having beliefs). Having put considerable effort into both, I have to date not been able to reveal an objective Truth.

Maybe “what is truth” should be “what is true”
Seeing what is “out there” that is an objective thing – truth is quite different to seeing what is inherently true in things!!

I can't hold a truth. It doesn't exist as an object. It is an impossible noun, but certainly exists as an adjective. The quality of trueness exists in things and situations and ideas.

“What is a Quality of Trueness?”

I don't know, but I recognise it? When something resonates, it feels right. It's true for me.

But I have experienced knowing something as true, only to later know it to be not true.

“Is there Truth in Knowledge ?”

Because I recognise the uniqueness of my sensory inputs and in particular the unique experiences that have brought me to who I am now, I know (believe in an intellectual way) that I know nothing. That I have no absolute knowledge.
I believe that nothing can be known with absolute certainty. Here is my logic;
In a dream I believe I am real. My belief is as strong the belief I have now that I am awake and typing this. But how do I know that I am not dreaming this.
I can only know that I am dreaming this after I wake up.
I can't know that I am NOT dreaming this.
When I was a kid I dreamt that I woke up and went to school, then my mum woke me up and told me to get ready for school.
Logic tells me that it is feasible that if that happened in a dream then I might have been dreaming that I had a dream.
So you see, it is impossible to actually know anything.
Do I know this ? Obviously if the above is true and complete I can only believe this.
Even with this logic, it is always possible for somebody to come along and point out a flaw in this whole line of thinking.
So, on the assumption that I can't know anything, I can only talk from a position of believing...
“Can you Know what you experience?”
My experience = my interpretation of my sense input, or rather, my interpretations of my reactions filtered through my beliefs.
How is my experience and my mind separate ?
Isn't my physical/emotional experience greatly influenced by my memory of my previous experience? Isn't my memory open to corruption from my beliefs about my self.
Isn't most of my experience largely the result of my expectations ?
I don't think that I can give any more credibility to my experience as being related to truth than I can my beliefs.

“Is something a truth because I hold (believe) it to be truth? If a group of people hold it as truth? If science can measure it?”

Personal and consensual beliefs are often referred to as Truths, but investigation reveals them as convenient beliefs to oil the workings of society. Even scientific results are held as a temporary Truth until more is learned and a 'deeper' Truth is revealed.
Seeing what is true in things is a way of seeing ...

Seeing (as it is used here) is a metaphor for knowing.
This knowing transcends the thing. It transcends You. You (your sense of a separate person) becomes lost in Experiencing the thing. The idea of a thing becomes lost in the Experiencing.

You and It become the Experience. I believe it is here that Truth may be tangible, but certainly not separate.
I have a feeling that truth is there to be ‘known’ by looking with the right kind of eyes. I think it isn’t something separate or different but a way of seeing ‘what is’ without the coloration of opinion – not that I can disappear opinion, but if I am alert then I can see what coloration it causes (in myself)

To Summarise;

I can't know anything, I can only have beliefs.

In order to navigate through life I need to behave 'as if' certain of those beliefs are True.
This is my Truth.

hate

All conflict with which we personally identify reflects a defensive posture from a Fear-Self. When the desires and needs of a Fear-Self are blocked, serious and emotional conflict will ensue. Fear-Selves hate anything that prevents them from getting their way; this applies to all kinds of situations, from long lines in the supermarket to threats to our loftiest aspirations. Every such obstacle pushes us into the shadow of the Wound, and that means suffering. When there is suffering, a Fear-Self will instantly emerge, full of rage, complaining bitterly about the presenting situation and looking to do something to 'correct' it. This is the source of nearly all violence in the world. Eric Gross p424 Liberation from the Lie


i wonder where hate sits with lack.
How do i experience hate?
As a mind/body which expresses most things passionately, it is easy for me to say "i hate idiot politicians/repressive regimes/people who litter/etc, but is it really hate? 
It doesn't matter if it is hate or something else, it is my awareness of the process as it occurs that has the potential to free me from this suffering.
If recognition of the upwelling of emotion happens then it will flip me into a different perspective. One which will remind me that the 'hated' are also people who are reflecting their own conditioning.
i can hope that circumstances will arise for them that will facilitate positive change in their motivation for the shitty behaviour, but that is me attempting to fill a lack in myself.
The intensity of the hate emotion could be addictive. The kind of addiction seen in the religious. Certainly the single minded focus of intense hatred might be described as orgasmic. (in that the left [thinking] brain shuts down and the right [feeling] brain enjoys uninhibited [by the rational left brain] expression)
A relaxed consideration of my own process of hating is possibly the best chance i have of changing my own conditioning.
If my sense of lack is a result of my experience of being invalidated, and hate expressed is certainly invalidating for the recipient, then there is some kind of projection taking place. At least the internalised invalidation process is being perpetuated.
Is it compassion realised (not fake/overlaid compassion) that can act as a circuit breaker.
Let's not hate the haters for they are us and we are them. (stones in glass houses)


i hate the hating,
that separates me from you
please, give me a hug.

lack

"The feeling of lack is the 'mother' of our dreaded emotional experiences. It is a physical/bodily sensation. We experience it as a kind of inner hollowness or emptiness. We try to fill this lack with some kind of 'doing': We shop, start projects, dream about new relationships, practice a religion, join groups, have children, and whatever else we think can fill this hollow core.
This emotion - the feeling of lack - is anxious, insecure, and compulsive.

As long as we are identified with the experience of lack, we will operate from a position of insecurity and fear.

As long as we believe that we are lacking, we will live in fear and desire.

We are constantly calling out to the world, "Fill me - I need another hit!" People try to fill the void with accomplishments, acquisitions, hopes, and dreams. But our holes are bottomless. No amount of material goods or achievements can ever remove the painful identification with lack that will always return in moments of doubt, boredom, crisis, or fear." Eric Gross from "Liberation from the Lie"

Do i have a feeling of lack?, now, sometimes, always?

How can i determine if i have lack?, or maybe a better question to 'reveal' if i have lack would be, "is any of my behaviour a response to lack?"

Answer is "of course."

When i am hungry i am responding to lack when i seek food.

But then, there are times when i think i am hungry but i recognise that eating is a substitute for another unspecified wanting.

When i feel cold i seek a coat or heater, but then i recognise that there are times when i feel cold and everybody else is feeling warm... More often i am taking my coat off while everybody else is keeping theirs' on. This is a case of responding to a lack of 'cool' (pun intended)

When i could use a took to facilitate a job, i am responding to a lack of finger strength to turn a nut, but i have a shed full of tools 'just in case'

At a more subtle level is the question "how does a sense of lack determine my identity?"

Before i get into "my identity", i need to reference "a sense of lack".

It is a 'sense' of lack that we are talking about. Actual lack isn't the issue here. It is perceived lack that is the issue. That is the lack, when filled, promises a feeling of satisfaction. In particular a feeling of satisfaction in how i feel about myself.

This bring me to "my identity". This is my 'sense' of me. The concept i hold of who/what i am. This concept was being formed from birth and an early lack was probably when i was prohibited from suckling my mothers breast. After that there were a profusion of frustrations where i was stopped from doing what i wanted or made to do what i didn't want to do. Maybe even more basic is the (possible) lack of security i felt when i was expelled from the womb.

Regardless of the details, i recognise a lifetime of trying to be 'more' than i thought i was.

But now...

Have things changed? Am i still 'ruled' by a sense of lack? Am i writing this from a sense of lack?

Certainly i experience from time to time overeating. i experience anger and frustration when politicians talk rot with an attitude of knowing. (and many other examples)

So yes, lack is still in my life. I cope with disapproval with hardly a raise of emotion these days. Overeating happens a lot less often than it used to.

i feel lack but have a choice about responding to it.

Meditation seems to be what has given me the space to 'see' situations more objectively. To see what i would have done automatically with enough space to decide to do something differently.

Vipassana Meditation in particular has shown me that pain is only partly physical. That pain when tolerated, it changes. To be more precise, my attitude to pain changes. The pain is still there (say the pain in the legs from sitting in one position for an hour) but i don't need to be ruled by it. In extreme cases the pain that i thought i couldn't tolerate any longer has transformed and become a doorway into amazing revelations.

It has shown me that suffering is the mental overlay placed on pain. That suffering is self perpetuating. We feel a pain then tell ourselves how bad it is going to be and respond to that. Sometimes building a large complex story with immense suffering.

i am standing. i am breathing. How wonderful is that? How amazing it that?

How can there be actual lack while that is happening?

How can there be lack,

when this organism works?

i appreciate.

Memory...

How strange memory is.
A short story...
Two days ago i was playing golf with 3 friends. We had just finished putting and were recording each others scores for that hole. We also record the number of putts and one friend couldn't remember how many putts he made just minutes before. A discussion revealed that none of us could remember even though we had all watched him putting.
Some discussing of ball placing and comments made and the memory came flooding back to me. i could clearly picture the ball and the sequence that led up to it falling into the hole.
Obviously the memory was there but access to it was the problem. That could be a function of how the memory was stored. (short term/long term etc)
i have come to realise that anything i remember is fallible as to it's accuracy.
My wife and i often remember events differently.
Every situation is experienced through the personal 'lens' of each individual.
Where i pictured the balls position in the story above someone else may primarily remember the conversation had at the time and someone else may remember their movement around the green.
Add to this the emotion of elation or disappointment (or whatever) at the success or failure of the putt.
The degree of attention paid to a situation no doubt plays an important role on how well an event is remembered.
Memory being a function of the mind/brain is conditioned and so will probably continue to function after Enlightenment much the same as it always did only there won't be added anxiety about whether it is the onset of Alzheimer's or the self beratement that often accompanies forgetfulness.
See a comment from an Enlightened One on a post about Alzheimer's.
Memory of course, is mostly what our personal story is composed of. The history component of our identity is all memory. When we say "I like..." or "I don't like..." it is usually memory based. When we think "I am a person who..." it is memory based. Even our intentions for the future are memory based.

i remember when,
i forgot how to be me.
Was i someone else?

Truth

This is a copy and paste of my post from a discussion on the Wisdom Page web site.
Socrates taught us not accept our existing thoughts as true. Step back and reevaluate the truth and veracity of your opinions and beliefs. Seek to know your real self and seek truth.
With this in mind...
Truth
What is truth?
If I accept the premise that truth exists as something separate, definable and see-able then I have to do something (focus) to experience it. (or stop doing something that stops me seeing it – i.e. having beliefs)
If, as I believed before, (I don’t know what I believe now) that truth is purely subjective, that everybody’s truth was true but peculiar to them, then there couldn’t/wouldn’t be an objective “external” truth. (hmmm, maybe they could both exist…)
What made it uniquely and peculiarly their truth was their history of experiences which by bringing to bear on the current situation, caused the perceptual distortions. I further reasoned (held the belief) that when the distortions were removed then nothing would remain, ergo that non existence was truth, or alternatively, that our historically affected perception made something out of nothing, made truth into false (the noun) and perceived it as form – thus creating a continuation of the world (“reality”)

Trouble is that as good as this sounds, it’s all bullshit!
It’s just another historically (or should I say hysterically?) affected distortion (or should I say perversion?) it’s just mind crap – making me feel better/good because I can believe that i know something that most people don’t know.
How can all of this mental bullshit lead to a clear, undistorted perception of the nothing that is truth (I still prefer my idea of reality – well not prefer (I don’t think…) I just can’t see (that is, think) how if ‘all is one’, how that there can be anything that is not the product of perception.
But this is still mental dribble, verbal diarrhoea and can only be of any use like the signpost or paved road as a travel tool.
I still maintain that the only reality is what we FEEL.
The way we feel is what we base our sense of well being on, our self esteem is directly related to how we feel…
Is what I feel real? Truth?
Is reacting to “what is” only being aware of actual happening, ie the sensation that tells me that I need to blow my nose, or the sound/feeling of gas gurgling in my guts or the image that is constructed in my brain - the stimulation of each of my senses? These my mind sense tells me are all coloured by history &/or my desires, so are not to be trusted.
Do I trust my mind that tells me that they are not to be trusted? This also, is monomaniacally focused on bringing me desires that will make me “feel good”
IT’S ALL FALSE, even the idea that it’s all false is false.
What is left?
Can I go through life with the false belief that it’s all false (this doesn’t make anything true!!) not believing even my sense inputs? My mind?
Well, yes.
This sounds like I will not make any decisions, just do what is in front of me, be purely reactive. Hmmm, that doesn’t sound like how it “should be” Why? – because (like everything else I believe) it’s something I picked up somewhere in the past.
An animal would be (?) purely reactive – reacting to external or internal stimuli.
A significant difference between humans and animals is the humans ability to appreciate ‘choice’.
If we are ‘animal like’ we can choose not to choose. That is, we can weigh up what is being offered and choose the one that doesn’t involve ego …
Reactive or Responsive ? Outcome focused. Which one is that ? I like the idea of catching the ‘winds of change’ as they blow by to tell me what to do. Not making ‘conscious’ decisions about how to “act” (how to be?)
Be lief, believe… be lief (lief is an adverb meaning willingly i.e. readily without reluctance) so belief is - be willingly !! Maybe SEE willingly is more “reality” (or truth) based.

OK, so I can’t see TRUTH, but I can see false.
How do I negate or strip away or make transparent the FALSE?
Just see it!
Recognise it for what it is. The False will evaporate in the face of scrutiny. (or so I believe) BUT, if I can’t believe what I believe (because [as I believe] all beliefs are False, how can I operate in the world?
I can only operate in the world by navigating my way around using beliefs…. How can I negate false when everything I see, hear, touch, smell, taste, and think is FALSE?
If I accept that everything is FALSE, then I also have to accept that I (my perception of ME) am FALSE. Hey that’s a no brainer. That I is obviously my ego. (but that is my mind telling me that – and it is also unbelievable. i.e FALSE) HELP!! There is nowhere to go….
Wait a minute! My bum just told me that it needed emptying. Is that FALSE? Partly. I guess it really just told me that it’s load COULD be reduced. To think that I HAD to go was false. To think that if I didn’t go then the sensation would increase to a Pain, was false. OK, maybe this is IT, my mind didn’t need to get involved at all in this, but my automatic response IS my mind interfering – based on beliefs.

I know (believe in an intellectual way) that I know nothing. That i have no absolute knowledge
Ok, I believe that nothing can be known with certainty. ( to know = see truth ?)(truth = objective fact ?)(fact = what actually IS ?)
I don't think (believe) that it matters. (I certainly can't know if it matters)
My experience = my interpretation of my sense input ? or my beliefs about my interpretations of my reactions ?
How is my experience and my mind separate ?
Isn't my physical/emotional experience greatly influenced by my memory of my previous experience?
Isn't most of my experience largely the result of my expectations ?
I don't think that I can give any more credibility to my experience as being related to truth than I can my beliefs.
Ok, I believe that nothing can be known with certainty. ( to know = see truth ?)(truth = objective fact ?)(fact = what actually IS ?)
I don't think (believe) that it matters. (I certainly can't know if it matters)

If truth is an ongoing interaction with the present (relating to “what is”) then truth is always new (it still could be the same truth)

Maybe “what is truth” should be “what is true”
Seeing what is “out there” that is an objective thing – truth is quite different to seeing what is inherently true in things!!
Seeing what is true in things is a way of seeing and seeing (here) is a metaphor for knowing.
This knowing transcends the thing. It becomes Experiencing the thing. (and so experience the dissolution of a boundary between the thing and you) and further investigation of the boundary between you and your name (ego – identity) the dissolution of which leaves you only as past thought patterns floating as memories on the ethers of now.
I have a feeling that truth is there to be ‘known’ by looking with the right kind of eyes. I think it isn’t something separate or different but a way of seeing ‘what is’ without the coloration of opinion – not that I can disappear opinion, but that I can see what coloration it causes (in myself)

If 1 plus 1 equals 2 then you would consider that to be a fact.
If I believe that 1 plus 1 equals 3 and I state my belief as fact, then, am I telling the truth?, My truth.

As it Is

'It is as it is'.
There is nothing i can do
that's not 'as it is'.

watched Gran Torino last night...

i watched Gran Torino last night and today my mind keeps coming back to it. (is this what a good movie does?)
My take on it (part of it..) is about fear. Fear of the unknown. Fear generated by the holes in our story that get filled with urban myth. ("all you gooks are good at maths...")
So here we have a Korea veteran who sees all asians as Gooks and is prepared to shoot any that step on his front lawn. He progresses through the movie in acceptance and even brotherhood ("these gooks have more in common with me than i thought..") and at the end he willingly ends his life in a sacrifice for the future of a (gook) friend.
Now this bloke is really right wing but in a typically  conservative manner he embraces the most humanitarian act possible.
This movie shouts out (for me) that the problems of the world are all emerging from fear.
Fearful people are defensive which is the opposite of the openness required for learning new ways of being.
Thankfully i have a glimmer of how the apparent mess the world is in is ok.

It's the Doing...

The pleasure from life is in the appreciating of the doing.
This thought hit me a few days ago. It was profound, but like a dream the profundity has faded. i just remember that the seeing of this promised to change my life.
It was another way to arrive at 'being in the now' or doing the "be here now" of Ram Dass.
What can it be, to be fully immersed in the 'here' and 'now' but to be 'alive' with vibrant awareness of sensory input.
The mind, like a shovel, is a tool used to make it easier to achieve a particular outcome.
If i have to attend to the condition of the shovel to be able to use it, then i am diverted from my original aim. Likewise if i get sidetracked by the contents of my mind...

Alzheimer's. Can you be enlightened and have this?

Alzheimer's. Can you be enlightened and have this?
Can/Might an Enlightened person get Alzheimer's Disease ?
Can a person with Alzheimer's become Enlightened ?
Enlightened people throughout history have died of cancer and other 'normal' physical diseases.
Alzheimer's disease is a degeneration of the brain so it is perfectly reasonable to speculate that an 'Awake' person can get it.
For the not yet Enlightened with Alzheimer's to 'Awaken' is decreasingly likely as the disease progresses.
As an 'as yet unenlightened' without Alzheimer's, i am only speculating about this.

Wise thoughts...

Wise thoughts...
There can't be Wise Thoughts, can there?
Thoughts are just thoughts. What they are about... The response to them... The consequences of a reaction to the thought... The thought consequence to a thought and the thought stream and the consequences of action taken as a result of that thought stream, that is where the wisdom or absence of it is.

example;
i see a mess on the floor as i go somewhere.
i step over it vaguely thinking "not my problem."
Then time seems to slow as i take a 'greater' perspective on what just happened.
i see that i didn't want to interrupt my intention to get somewhere (probably to do something)
i see that what i was going to do will be delayed by only seconds if i pause to pick up the mess.
i also see that if i do the job that i will save someone else the time and effort of doing it.
i also see that to bend down and pick up the mess will give me the benefit of the valuable exercise which helps me keep more flexible and help burn some calories (i need to lose about 8kg)
i can now see that i feel good about picking up the mess.
The effort to pick up the mess which seemed great on first stepping over the mess now seems small.
i now have reasons to feel good about myself whereas before i would have has some background guilt for not picking up the mess.

before wisdom.

What is there before Wisdom?
There is no 'before wisdom'!
There is only before 'awareness of wisdom'
Even before there is 'awareness of wisdom' there is occasional expressions of wisdom. There most likely no recognition that it is wisdom. This is (possibly) because of the idea that wisdom is something that only old people from other cultures might possess.
Wisdom is not learned, it is revealed.
It cannot be possessed because it is a process and not a thing.
First there has to be an acceptance that Wisdom exists as a possibile reality.
Enquiry and recognition are the revealers.
Enquiry into whether there are more possibilities.
Recognition of a particular feeling, an altered state of consciousness.
Recognition of a rhythm in the flow.
Recognition of an effortless arising of possibilities.

more on Wisdom...

Wisdom deserves a lot more than just the previous post.
i probably couldn't do justice to this subject no matter how much conceptualisation i do.
i imagine that i only know a little of Wisdom.
i have a feeling, a physical sensation that i recognise when i am being wise. At the same time there is a 'wide angle' view of the subject. An absence of 'me' and an absence of opinion is evident.
When i am being wise, that 'wide angle' view means that lateral possibilities as well as vertical possibilities are considered with logic checksum processing. Ideas 'appear' without effort. (as ideas do)
It seems that wisdom is mainly/only present when a decision is required. (this needs testing...)
Time distortion exists as when in a conversation the decision as to how to respond is made after a seeming relaxed consideration of the whole range of possibilities. All this occurs during what appears to be a normally paced conversation.
It is a distinctly an altered state of consciousness.

The above is noticed from inside wisdom.

Wisdom

Wisdom is not some thing.

It is not something you can add to yourself.

It is what is left when the ignorance about how the world really works, is no longer there. 

An example;

Take the situation where a toddler does something naughty.

One person might say "you are a naughty boy" and eventually with enough repetition and reinforcement (emotional threats or pleadings) the toddler may start to believe that this is integral to him. The child will come to believe that HE is a naughty person. When he describes himself he will add naughtiness to his characteristics. 

Another person might say "doing that is naughty, don't do it."

This means that the child has a choice about doing that behaviour. It's not him, it's something he does or doesn't do. He not a victim of his personality.

The wise person would see that maybe something in the circumstances triggered the behaviour, be it tiredness or an external stimulation and decide that rather than chastise the child it may be time for a sleep, etc. The wise person might also encourage him to see what is behind his behaviour.

The unwise person may take the child's behaviour personally, that is, they may believe that the child is intentionally interrupting them or demanding attention from them because it doesn't like what they are doing.

People who are very unwise take everything personally.

A wise person sees the bigger picture. They don't automatically respond with a judgement that this is "good" or "bad". Most people approach the world with an opinion which becomes the 'coloured glasses' through which they see the world. 

Is the glass half full or is the glass half empty?

How would a wise person see this? The pessimist says "half empty". The optimist says "half full".

The wise person might say "we have a certain amount of water and a certain amount of space, what is the intention for this glass? "

i was thinking that 1st Sept might be timely for a summary.

i was thinking that a summary of current something might be timely when i realised that i was setting up a progress dynamic. A concept that something would happen in the future. Implying that i can get incrementally closer to Enlightenment. (i don't believe this to be the way of it, however i can get wiser while i play around the edges of it.)
Therefore, i have to acknowledge that i operate in time whilst (at the same time) believing to be true, that outside of my idea of myself that time doesn't exist. That time is just one convenient construct (concept) in the world i have manufactured in my imagination.
How do i reconcile the disparity?
No disparity. Each One is a view from a different side of the gateless gate.
Seeing/believing/knowing, that i am not awake, (on the assumption that if i was awake that i would know it), presupposes that at a future time that 'awakening' might occur. This is true whilst at the same time believing to be true that 'awakening' can't happen in the future as the future is nothing more that fantasy. A collection of 'what if' thoughts. Awakening can only happen NOW.
Another apparent disparity.
Hmm, can i say i was referring to some future NOW? (is that an oxymoron?)
When it 'happens' it will be a NOW. Won't it?
i think that NOW is only a concept. If i am experiencing something now, i have no sense of now. i am the experience. It is only later that i might describe the sequence from a particular NOW.
Even as i say the word NOW, it is already part of the past.
Being open to the ceaselessly unfolding NOW cannot possibly be my experience. It can only be an externally perceived concept.
If that description were accurate for me, then my experience would be of the sense inputs as they occurred. This of course includes the mind sense.
Any idea of past, present or future belong to the mind and the story it constructs around each experience.

Time is useful for;
appointments in the future,
but not for living.

Ask yourself what you really hate in people you see as vulnerable or weak.

Ask yourself what you really hate in people you see as vulnerable or weak.
Eric Gross - Liberation from the Lie 
Hmm, vulnerable people are not hateful. Unless i hate the sadness and desire to 'fix' things that wells up in me. i certainly hate some of the destructive behavior some vulnerable people exhibit.
i feel extremely uncomfortable (sometimes frightened) around drunk people. 
Once you have settled on what vulnerable type you really can't stand, write down the specific content of this visceral contempt image to really nail it down. 
Drunk women were (are?) embarrassing. When i was a child my mum used to embarrass me by calling attention to herself and insisting that i dance with her. It always ended with her having a fight with her sister or mother.
Drunk blokes frighten me. (at least they used to. It hasn't been tested in a long time) They bring intense emotion to anger and violence. They do stupid things that often ends up in someone being hurt. i don't like Pubs. 
Then consider the following: The vulnerable type you hate the most is the personification of your Wound.
Hmm, it's the 'out of control' aspect in common to both gender drunks.
consider what they really can't stand about adult members of their same gender. Thoroughly immerse yourself in what you hate about others. The details of this contempt should give you a clear understanding of your personal Wound. 
The games drunk people play. The mutual (ego) masturbation present when a group of blokes gather at the pub on the one hand is an excellent display of mateship and connection, except that there really isn't any connection. Each is just reinforcing his story. i guess that is why they are mates.
concentrate on what you hate, but this time consider what you despise about those who are powerful.
The lack of compassion.
The powerful people you hate are mirrors of your original invalidators.
This one is easy. i despised the lack of compassion in my father as a powerless child. All adults had an unreasonable amount of power over kids (then) but he enforced his demands with the razor strop when i was young and the iron (power) chord when i reached adolescence.




i feel i have changed significantly in the past couple of months, so all of the above needs re-testing.

let's explore living life as a 'dreamt' one

Experience is what counts in this realm.
An intellectual understanding is just thoughts unless resonation occurs.
i have an intellectual understanding that the i/me i think i am is just that. Thinking i am.
i understand that the immersion in the details of that story is what 'hides' reality.
i believe that the story is where the separation from everybody and everything else occurs.
i can see how that separation is the illusion that creates the beginning of suffering.
The mind creates a bubble, inside of which everything is the story.
I am a character in that story. I am a dreamt one.

Each time it comes to me that i am a dreamt one, i realise that i am someone else's character in their dream.
(that someone else may indeed be a (presumably greater) me dreaming the me i think i am.)

Normal definitions of dreaming would go something like this;
A person is asleep (although day dreams are common )
It is the persons mind that creates the cast and props. Everything is a production of the mind.
That there is some value from the 'showing' of production.

Presumption: That an 'awakened' person know that they are 'awake'
i don't know it, ergo. i'm not.
Therefore i am a 'dreamt' one in someone's dream.
Therefore...
free will?
How can there be free will when i am displaying someone's need for expression?
determinism?
How can events be determined when someone doesn't even know their own need for expression to the point where it has to be expressed in a dream?
agnostic?
Best bet. If i take myself to be dreamt by a more primal me, how do i know that the dreamer of me isn't himself a dreamt one in an even more primal me. (in fact this is the most believable concept for me)
This in fact goes back infinitely. It had no beginning and will have no end.
There is no dreamer at the beginning (turtles all the way down!)
There is only dreamt one.

another glimpse was...

Another glimpse was how people create 'what if' scenarios then react to them as if they were real, thereby making it real.
It all started when i was sitting in my daughters house talking to her.
We were in the lounge room and i was looking out the window as i explained to her that it was too difficult for me to fix her reversing lights when her car appeared to be moving backwards!
i dashed to my feet and ran outside just in time to see it crash through the gate, collecting both front doors and folding them right around against the front mudguards on its way across the road and crashed into the front left side headlight and pushing the front of my car across about a yard.
Well, there is the original flush of adrenaline, then the shock while assessment occurs. Here is where the 'what if' scenarios start. i guess habit might kick in with the type of constructs that happen. A pessimist would instantly look for the worst possible outcomes while an optimist will build equally detailed possibilities for the future. These will occur because of the mind being in its element when it comes to constructing stories. The problem comes when a person reacts to the constructs as though they were real with great emotion.
One of us reacted to the possibility that my 2yr old grandson might have been behind the car and would have surely been killed or at least maimed severely. The other reacted with great relief that my car was there to stop hers from crashing through the flimsy back gate and down a steep hill into the bedroom of a house. Both were emotional reactions to 'what if' stories.
It was then it hit me. i saw the incredible influence this has on normal daily life. We are constantly reacting to 'what if' scenarios.



what if i get rich?
what if poverty moves in?
what if 'i don't know?'