GENIUS FORUMS

The truth of the nature of man's awareness that liberates him from all human doctrines of "they say" is:

Man is always only in conscious union with his own thoughts of I Am.

The degree by which he understands this truth of the nature of his awareness is equal to the degree of his liberation from his being bound to the beliefs of "they say."

Man is always only in conscious union with his own thoughts of I Am.

Thanks, I get that in this way.

Samsara is a relational field in which we relate as a sense of a separate I, We,It.
The field is ideational or ideas are exchanged.
We never directly access reality but rather have only access to our ideas about reality.
Whether it's an abstract or concrete 'thing' we never know it completely, rather we have a notion of it.
If we have an abstract about God, all we have is a story.

What we have are projections and interpretations.

'Things' are appearances to a mind.

The root of all appearance is mind.

We can take refuge in the mind and disregard appearances for the most part.

We ought to take notice of a cliff, because if we step off it, we suffer but why there's a cliff, we don't know.

A copper wire can be made and electricity can run thru' it with resistance at normal temperature.
Put the wire in a critically cold environment and the electricity will run without resistance. We don't know why.

Any agreement?

Man is always only in conscious union with his own thoughts of I Am.

I don't think there is a beginning or end to how many ways that can be mocked, ridiculed and ultimately dismissed as gibberish.

Pam: Man is always only in conscious union with his own thoughts of I Am.

Dennis: Thanks, I get that in this way.

Samsara

Stop right there. :-)

Samsara is a concept of projection into a collective field of awareness, is it not? As if the essence of samsara is not what and who you are. Allow me to illustrate, using your emanations of samsara below:

Samsara is a relational field in which we relate as a sense of a separate I, We,It.
The field is ideational or ideas are exchanged.

is, as I stated above, your projection into a collective God, or Self, or I am, which is the not the reality of the individual infinity of you, of your God, of your Self, of your I am. When I transform your projection above into the reality of your singular infinity of your thought substance and essence, your I Am, it becomes:

I am my relational field in which I relate to my sense of a separate I, We, It. My field is ideational or my ideas are exchanged.

We never directly access reality but rather have only access to our ideas about reality.

is transformed from a projection into collectivity into the reality of my Infinite I, to become: I never directly access my reality but rather have only access to my ideas about reality.

No need to repeat myself with the rest of your “we” analysis'.

Whether it's an abstract or concrete 'thing' we never know it completely, rather we have a notion of it.

Whether it's an abstract or concrete 'thing', I never know it completely, rather I have a notion of it.

If we have an abstract about God, all we have is a story.

What we have are projections and interpretations.

'Things' are appearances to a mind.

The root of all appearance is mind.

We can take refuge in the mind and disregard appearances for the most part.

I have separated this statement from the rest to point out the contradiction you have made in your analysis, a contradiction which is at the core of the principle of why most seekers of the wisdom of themselves cannot be expanded beyond projection or appearance of their finiteness unto their infinity. Why most wise men remain bound to their logic and reason of the earth, not becoming the Living Wisdom of their Totality of I Am.

Note you correctly realized that the root of all appearance is mind. And then you made the statement that we can take refuge in the mind. I assume that you when you spoke of taking refuge, you were referring to taking refuge from appearance. Expanding upon this logic, if mind is appearance, as you correctly stated, how then can you take refuge from appearance by going into that which is its root cause?

This is why it is necessary to step into one's metaphorical, living identity of I Am, of using the mind to go beyond the mind. After all, the emanation of mind is your emanation to use, is it not? Below I use the thought "door" as an example of one way to go beyond the thought "door" so I can take refuge beyond the thought "door", but any universal symbol of the darkness of ignorance of the Totality of Self can be used. Piercing my veil is an example of another way of being transformed beyond one's causal identity with "mind."

I am the door of my darkness of my mind of appearance. I am also the one who knocks on the inside of my imagined door. I am also the one who turns my imagined knob. I am also the one who says “open sesame.” I am the one who stands on my imagined threshold. I am the one who steps over my imagined threshold. I am the one, then who takes refuge in my Pure Awareness of my mind, my door. I am The One. And, as The One who stands in my refuge of being The One who makes my mind appear, what then, becomes of my mind of my appearance of being split into two? It begins to be absorbed, does it not? My darkness, being consumed of my light?

We ought to take notice of a cliff, because if we step off it, we suffer but why there's a cliff, we don't know.

I suffer because I believe the cliff is not of my own emanation of appearance. My belief that I can hurt myself or kill myself is why I continue returning to my idea of birth and death, of disease, of mental illness – of being in opposition to ME. One Me.

A copper wire can be made and electricity can run thru' it with resistance at normal temperature.
Put the wire in a critically cold environment and the electricity will run without resistance. We don't know why.

I can't know why intellectually, by analyzing the effects of the senses, but I can know why these things appear and disappear in my awareness, causing me to experience a split within my I am.

Any agreement?

Agreement is a projection of I am, which is a refusal to accept total responsibility for all emanations of Self Awareness.

I am The One.

Pam: Man is always only in conscious union with his own thoughts of I Am.

Blair: I don't think there is a beginning or end to how many ways that can be mocked, ridiculed and ultimately dismissed as gibberish.

If mocking, ridiculing and ultimately dismissing those things of which you become aware brings you peace or order, then who am I to judge? Of my own analysis of the wisdom of words, however, which you are welcome to challenge with your wisdom of words, mocking, ridiculing and dismissing do not bring peace/order to one's being.

Perhaps complete realization of being in perfect harmony of oneself is not what you seek. It is, however, what I seek.

We can take refuge in the mind and disregard appearances for the most part.

Ceasing to make the visible world a source of happiness.
Living in the presence of the One, the Infinite.
There is but One Life.