Seeking no more.

[Matthew]

If I am watching a movie, I do not perceive the pain. However, if I am experiencing the movie, I appear to be experiencing the pain.

Imagine a movie or a video game in the future. Not even in the far future, we might have that in a couple of years.
Where the image is 3D and projected in a way that looks like real perception. In fact, that already exists.



They are even already implementing a level of sensation when it comes to G-Forces.




There being a movie or a simulation, that is completely indistinguishable from reality, is not science fiction anymore.
In fact, it will soon be possible to directly input those data into the brain without having to make a detour through the sensory apparatus.

Imagine such a kind of movie or video game. Or try it, to the extend at which it exists already.
Pain, emotion, storyline... All this will seem very very real. So real in fact, that one will forget that it is just a game and be somewhat lost in it.
But does that make it real?
No. There will be a point of realisation and maybe a point of quitting the game, finishing the movie.
At which it will be seen with perfect clarity, that all this apparent happening wasn't and isn't real.
Nothing was ever harmed, no one was ever truly happy or sad.
It was all just an empty image with special effects.

Don't take this as absolute truth. See it as a good pointer.

However, if consciousness is all that there is, then is there just experiencing, or is there no such thing as experiencing?

There definitely is experience/awareness.
That is the one and only thing that is undeniably true.
The one and only thing that withstands every level of scrutiny.
It is what's left when all that is not true subsides.
What does not exist, however, is an experiencing of.
There are no two, there is only one.
The one great projection, in which experience is projected as one seamless whole including an apparent perceiver and even a sense of being the perceiver.

[DWThomas]

Thank you for the response. I have imagined the video/movie expanded to include senses, thoughts and feelings.

I am having a little difficulty with the difference between experiencing and awareness. Experiencing appears to be dynamic where awareness seems to be stillness. When all of the phenomenal is dropped, is there nothing left but stillness?

Is that which is projected from stillness/potentiality, consciousness? Then, within consciousness there is an apparent perceiver and that that is perceived, which is the phenomenal?

Is that that is the stillness or the consciousness or neither?

[Matthew]

I am having a little difficulty with the difference between experiencing and awareness.

There is no difference.
Experience and awareness are the same.

Experiencing appears to be dynamic where awareness seems to be stillness.

Look at the ever unchanging amidst all change.

When all of the phenomenal is dropped, is there nothing left but stillness?

Not really. It's more like an all underlying continuous primordial vibration. Burning, like an eternal flame of clarity.
Extremely exciting!

When closely looking at so called empty space, it can be found that there is no such thing as empty space.
So called empty space is filled with countless quantum fluctuations, innumerable virtual particles popping in and out of existence by way of quantum field vibrations.
That's another way to describe what it feels like.
Emptiness filled with infinite potential.


I can point this out to you once you are done with your questions.
So you can see that for yourself.
Just tell when you're ready!

Is that which is projected from stillness/potentiality, consciousness?

Consciousness constitues literarily everything.
The projector and the projected are one wholeness.
The knowing and the known seamlessly so.

Then, within consciousness there is an apparent perceiver and that that is perceived, which is the phenomenal?

Also the apparent perceiver is phenomenal!

This can be pointed out much much better than explained.
You can see this for yourself.
Once you're finished with your questions!

[DWThomas]

Thank you again for answering my questions.

I do not have any more questions and I am ready for you to point the way.

[Matthew]

Very well!

In the following, please answer all my questions from present experience.
Please also refrain from asking questions yourself unless it's critical, it would interrupt the flow.
Such questions will be answered eventually or dissolve anyway.

Looking at and answering from present experience means to work with what is undeniably present right here right now.
What we're not interested in is any form of thought derived fantasy.

When answering a question and nothing can be found in present experience, then the answer is "nothing".
No need to go into thought content for some fantasy answer.

You can, however, name thought as an aspect of experience.
If the question is for example: "What does memory consist of?"
Then the answer is: "Memory consists of thought".

Then, within consciousness there is an apparent perceiver and that that is perceived, which is the phenomenal?

(The term "experiencing" is more accurate than the term "perceiving")

Hold your arm against your surrounding.
Against a door for instance.

Is there anything special about colour labelled "arm" compared to colour labelled "door"?
Is colour labelled "arm" experienced somehow differently to colour labelled "door"?

[DWThomas]

Answer: There is nothing more special about the arm or the door. Other than a conceptual idea (thought) of identification, there is no apparent difference of experience between arm and door. Both are perceived by visual and sensory.

[Matthew]

How is it known that arm is "me" and door is "not me"?

Which of these statements sound true to you?
-The door is seen
-The seeing of the door is known

-The arm is seen
-The seeing of the arm is known

[DWThomas]

I seen to have some control over the arm and not over the door.

In both statements the seeing of the arm/door seems more really.

[DWThomas]

Sorry about the spelling on the previous post.

[Matthew]

I seen to have some control over the arm and not over the door.

There are approximately 253000 muscle fibers in the biceps brachii alone.
How exactly do you control each of them?
Do you really?

How do you know that you have control over the arm more than over the door?

[DWThomas]

It seems like there is movement that is occurring; breathing, heartbeat, etc. But, there also seems to be an ability to have focused intention that appears to override the movement. Example; holding the breath and then the return to normal breathing pattern. It also appears that by direct intent, I can open or close the door.

[Matthew]

there also seems to be an ability to have focused intention

Okay this is important.

What is this focused intention made of?
What does it consist of?
Is it sensation? Can it be seen? Is it a thought?

It also appears that by direct intent, I can open or close the door.

What is the actual experience of a "direct intent"?
Please bring up a "direct intent" and have a close look at it.

What is it made of?
What does it consist of?
How is it actually experienced?

[DWThomas]

Direct or focused intent appears to be a thought based on desire. It often is in response to another thought or experience. Often, feeling may arise with the intention. There seems to be a link between focused intent and a reaction to a perceived experience. To objectively witness it, there appears to be nothing more than thought and sensation.

[Matthew]

Have a look around. Look at the entire spectrum of experience.
Can the entirety of experience be described with the terms
the Seen
the Heard
the Sensed
the Smelled
the Tasted and
the Cognised (thought)?

Do you experience anything beyond or besides those terms?
If so, please describe what it is and how exactly it is experienced.
Be alert!
What seems to be beyond or besides those terms could also be thought about such a thing, right?

[DWThomas]

Feelings come to mind but just another experience like the others. I see that any attachment to a sense, thought or feeling is just another thought.