Seeing Truth happening through Sky Kim

[Matthew]

The Truth is nearer to you than you are to yourself.


Wasn't there ALL ALONG a clear knowing of all this seeking?
Wasn't every confusion along the "path" also clearly known?

Can you find this empty knowing right now?

[SkyKim]

The Truth is nearer to you than you are to yourself.

Wasn't there ALL ALONG a clear knowing of all this seeking?
Wasn't every confusion along the "path" also clearly known?

I slightly understand what you point at. I'll keep looking.

Can you find this empty knowing right now?

I don't find it yet.

[Matthew]

You said that

Lisa's 17 videos from YouTube 1000% resonates with me.

What resonated most?

[SkyKim]

You said that

Lisa's 17 videos from YouTube 1000% resonates with me.

What resonated most?

Here are Lisa's videos
https://www.youtube.com/user/OneSpaciousness/videos

The most resonated one is "Celebration 1-10-12"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JdIuIdL-_o

This is why I resonated most (although why is relative and changes..)
The video describes the vivid and live moment of awakening.
"This is Presentation.. , subatomic particles of the space world were visible, palpable, alive and recognized as this presence... this being was the same as every other presence of the being.. There is only one presence.. one isness... this now looks at these eyes to you which is also it.. beingness of all, that all what is... itself being... being as this presence, being as the presence of lamp, wall, window, the shirts, hair, presence of you... it is Consciousness, the energy moves through itself causes itself to arise it's something that appears different and then when it's done arising, it falls back into itself. all ever was and all ever could be...A greeting from this presentation and iseness that looks out its eyes to your presentation going into the Awareness, the Isness, the Oneness, Being that is looking out of your eyes here. You are seen, you are seen, not as you, but as everything that is..."

Here talk does not go down to the level of listener much. It describes What IS as clear and vivid as possible, I think.
I resonated very clearly that there is no entity behind. If there is, we have to figure out where the entity comes from, which is not final Truth. It totally makes sense to me that there is Nothing, which arise as everything. It appears duality, so many things in the world starting from sand, animals, humans, stars, galaxy, universe, whatever it is.

It also makes sense to me your saying "Experiencing". Only experiencing is happening. No entity such as God, Consciousness, Totality behind. We just call what is God, Consciousness, Totality only when we have to discuss about it.

I don't see it yet, I don't know it yet. I don't know why, although sages told me that there is false sense of "I" or "Self" blinding me. Anyway I dropped the 'whys'.. Apparently, I don't see, but feel very natural when I hear Lisa's talk.

Let me just tell you some story behind...
This occurred recently, about few months ago. Wayne's saying years ago has lingered in me, "Does the bird which was singing out side exits to the one who didn't see/hearing it?" and Zhuang Zhu's butterfly quote "Now I do not know whether it was then I dreamt I was a butterfly, or whether I am now a butterfly dreaming I am a man."
The two quotes lingered in my years and it was so clear to me that they are the same pointer pointing to Truth when I heard Lisa's another video saying "there is no 7 billion's worlds... only one..". The quotes turned to "The bird exist to Whom?", "Who is the dreamer of butterfly or Zhuang Zhu?". Then, those two quotes lingered long time were dropped.

I had not figured out how "false I or self" related to "no entity exists, all there is consciousness, everything oneness...". Then it seemed clear to me that the "false I or self" whatever blinds me disappear, the Truth appears.

Now, I dropped those notions as well. I dropped all notions, teachings.

Thank you, _()_

[Matthew]

Then it seemed clear to me that the "false I or self" whatever blinds me disappear

Let us use the term "deluding".
"The false sense of self is deluding me".

Is that okay?


So let us find out what this "I or self" is exactly.
Whether it is something real or not.
Whether there is actually someone or something deluded by it or not.



When you STOP and attend to the entire spectrum of experience.
Not listening to thought content.
Could you describe the entirety of actual experience with the terms
hearing, tasting, smelling, (bodily) sensation and (observed) thought?


Is there something more or something beyond those terms?

[SkyKim]

Let us use the term "deluding".
"The false sense of self is deluding me".

Is that okay?

OK.

When you STOP and attend to the entire spectrum of experience.
Not listening to thought content.
Could you describe the entirety of actual experience with the terms
hearing, tasting, smelling, (bodily) sensation and (observed) thought?

Those senstations occur without any analysis until I pay attention to a sense and start to think about it.

Is there something more or something beyond those terms?

I don't find anything beyond those terms.

Thank you, _()_

[SkyKim]

Is there something more or something beyond those terms?

I don't find anything beyond those terms.

There is one more thing beyond those terms; vague anxiety, which is some kind of empty feeling and I cannot describe it and what exactly is. It sometimes strong, sometimes very hazy. Obviously, it's here now, I can feel it, not with sensation.
I used to assume why: due to concerning of job security, life security, unknown trauma from childhood, .... etc. But, I'm obviously clear that 'why' is just a story after the fact that we, as a human, put.

[Matthew]

Great courage is required in this process.
Sometimes even superhuman courage.
When fear comes up, resistance, anxiety...
Do not push it away, do not distract yourself and look away from it.
Go through it! Attend directly to it and see it for what it is.
You have the power to do that!

What does this "vague anxiety" consist of?
Attend to it directly!
Go through it.

In what realm, on which stage is this story about "vague anxiety" played out?

Is it really beyond thought?

Or isn't the notion "vague anxiety is something beyond thought" yet another thought?

[SkyKim]

What does this "vague anxiety" consist of?
Attend to it directly! Go through it.

In what realm, on which stage is this story about "vague anxiety" played out?
Is it really beyond thought?
Or isn't the notion "vague anxiety is something beyond thought" yet another thought?

It is a sense first like touch. Then, there is a thought recognizing the sense as a some kind of fear or anxiety.
First time I thought it's beyond thought. But, without a thought how it is recognized? All senses are recognized as a thought, otherwise, it's ignored like never exists. I don't remember or recognize the feeling of foot until now I thought about it and recognize it.

I like to have courage to overcome, but I don't know how to apply the courage to get rid of it. Rather, I accept it as is. It comes and goes like other thought. Please guide me if there is better way to deal with it.

Question! Is it OK for me to read other guide's conversation here? Or better NOT? I just read one and there is interesting question by a guide regarding Apple. Is it OK for me to bring the question here with you?

Thank you, _()_

[Matthew]

I accept it as is

Sounds good! You have a good feeling for this.



It is of course okay for you to read other threads!
But be aware, that it could give rise to expectations and comparison.
Expectations and comparison is a silent poison for this process.

I just read one and there is interesting question by a guide regarding Apple. Is it OK for me to bring the question here with you?

Sure! When this question speaks to you!
What question was it?

[SkyKim]

It is of course okay for you to read other threads!
But be aware, that it could give rise to expectations and comparison.
Expectations and comparison is a silent poison for this process.

Expectations and comparison is human nature, inevitable. So I stop reading those. Just you let me know if anything is necessary.

I just read one and there is interesting question by a guide regarding Apple. Is it OK for me to bring the question here with you?

Sure! When this question speaks to you!
What question was it?

Thread url
https://www.liberationunleashed.com/nat ... 15#p239911
Starting yesterday and by today, I read only up to forgetmenot's reply at PostWed Mar 14, 2018 4:56 pm. It is turned to my long hanging curiosity.

From my side, the apple exists only via thoughts through senses.
Whole world exists that way. Then, my key curious question remains "Does the apple exists outside of my experience? What is the apple?" Other people also see the apple. There must be something to be sensed. Other people are also recognized via sense..... Big curiosity in me for this..

Somehow I more into this question rather the false sense in general.. Although I think the question resolves when the false sense goes away first. This is why LU and you focus in the false sense, I think.

[Matthew]

It is the idea of twofold emptiness.
First we recognise the emptiness of a separate self (subject) and then we recognise the emptiness of the so called objective world. This is the approach of LU.
Often times the investigation stops when the self is seen to be empty, because there is just contentment left and no longing for truth anymore.
Which is great!
Sometimes the inquiry continues after recognising that there is no self. Then follows the inquiry into the other aspects of reality.
That is: Time, Subject-Object-Split, Location and more.

When your curiosity is much greater to recognise those other aspects as they are, then fine!
We can do that.
And by way of that, also the false sense of self can be seen for what it is.

From my side, the apple exists only via thoughts through senses.

You sense it, you smell it, you taste it and you know that it's an apple.

How do you know?

Does pure sensation tell anything about "apple"?
Does smell tell anything about "apple"?
Does taste tell anything about "apple"?

You can check this again but you already recognised that only thought tells something about "apple".
There is sensation, smell and taste and thought says: "apple".

Is that crystal clear so far?

Other people also see the apple.

How do you know about this?
Can this be known from direct experience or are you just believing what they tell you?

Other people also see the apple.

Is this an observation from direct experience?
Or is this an assumption?

[SkyKim]

It is the idea of twofold emptiness.
First we recognise the emptiness of a separate self (subject) and then we recognise the emptiness of the so called objective world. This is the approach of LU.
Often times the investigation stops when the self is seen to be empty, because there is just contentment left and no longing for truth anymore.
Which is great!
Sometimes the inquiry continues after recognising that there is no self. Then follows the inquiry into the other aspects of reality.
That is: Time, Subject-Object-Split, Location and more.

Wow! I'm so glad to hear this. I really appreciate your answer on this. No one tell me this clear, which I have assumed in the dark. I'm so exciting. Now I'm clear about the process and it's no big deal anymore :)

When your curiosity is much greater to recognise those other aspects as they are, then fine!
We can do that.
And by way of that, also the false sense of self can be seen for what it is.

I like to question "What is THIS?" rather than "Who am I"; THIS includes everything including I, Self and Objective World.
Whichever way it is, I wish there is nothing left on the path.
So, Thank you, Thank you!

From my side, the apple exists only via thoughts through senses.

You sense it, you smell it, you taste it and you know that it's an apple.

How do you know?

That's exactly I learned and I thought to my children.

Does pure sensation tell anything about "apple"?
Does smell tell anything about "apple"?
Does taste tell anything about "apple"?

I like to make sure this clear; Is sense thought? (I call it 'senses' for those sensation, smell, taste, vision, ... together. Is it OK?)
There is several levels before I say there is apple:
1. There is senses on goging
=> This is my assumption: because I don't know with Actual experience. Because it's before recognition. But, It's reasonable because when I recognize the sense with my attention. Is this right?
2. Thought recognizing the signal by the senses; I'm not sure this is thought or so called 'Pure Sense'. Most of senses are ignored and few senses are caught and recognized.
=> Question: Do you call this 'Thought' as well?
3. Now a thought occurs saying "it's apple".
4. Then, sometimes another thought occurs with a judgement saying "I'm hungry, I like to eat" or "I don't like apple" or "who put apple here! On my laptop!" and so on...

You can check this again but you already recognised that only thought tells something about "apple".
There is sensation, smell and taste and thought says: "apple".

Is that crystal clear so far?

Please clarify the questions above; senses vs thoughts.
I'm crystal clear that I call it apple because I learned the notion "apple". But, I'm not sure I'm following you due to the questions above.

Other people also see the apple.

How do you know about this?
Can this be known from direct experience or are you just believing what they tell you?

Other people also see the apple.

Is this an observation from direct experience?
Or is this an assumption?

This is really interesting point and I'm not clear.
With my direct experience, I know other people react about the object called "apple". So, I'm 100% sure there is something that I call "apple". However, it's totally different discussion whether the other people consider the object as "apple" the way I recognize it. I'm 100% sure that everyone have different idea of apple. From my experience of daily life, I see this all the time; People recognize things differently. Sometimes the gap is wide, sometime it's narrow. The degree of Gap is only from my point of view.

Thank you, _()_

[Matthew]

I like to question "What is THIS?" rather than "Who am I"

The object of an LU-inquiry in "The Gate" is not even about "Who am I".
It is about: "Does a separate self exist?"

"Who am I" is a different angle of approach.

It is highly unusual to pose the question "What is THIS" here in The Gate.
But when this is your highest desire, then you shall have it!


Be aware!
ALL pointers are contained in one pointer.
When one pointer cuts completely through, all other pointers will also hit the mark.

Or at least:
They will start to make sense.


But before we jump deeply into it, let's bring clarity regarding the terms used.
Good idea!

I like to make sure this clear; Is sense thought? (I call it 'senses' for those sensation, smell, taste, vision, ... together. Is it OK?)

Thought is experienced, thought is known.
Also the "senses" are experienced, they are known.

To call it "senses" is slightly inaccurate. "Senses" implies a sensory stream, which happens TO someone or something.
Also to differentiate between "senses" and thought implies that there is a difference in the experience of thought and the "senses".
Is there?
Is there a difference in the experience of thought and the heard for example?


For pragmatical purposes it is best to stick to these terms:

Actual/direct experience consists of
the seen, the heard, the sensed, the tasted, the smelled and thought.

All these aspects are experienced, they are equally known.

Can you work with that?



Answering the other questions directly would turn this into a teaching rather than a pointing.
I'd like to avoid that.
They can become clear with what is written above.
Otherwise they will become clear soon.

[SkyKim]

Before I answer other questions. Let me clarify some words further.

Thought is experienced, thought is known.
Also the "senses" are experienced, they are known.

I'm not familiar the term 'Known', 'know'. Do we use it to refer "it's clear or obvious"?

Wasn't there ALL ALONG a clear knowing of all this seeking?
Wasn't every confusion along the "path" also clearly known?

Can you find this empty knowing right now?

I was not 100% clear what you mean by "knowing"