Welcome to The Duncan Trussell Family Hour Center for Self-Optimization

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

DinduNuffin

Hrair
  • Content count

    484
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Community Reputation

2 Chaotic Neutral

5 Followers

About DinduNuffin

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

513 profile views
  1. now sir, why do you suggest that the speaker is not a man of his word?
  2. full engagement subsumes the self. FULL ENGAGEMENT SUBSUMES THE SELF. hopefully you see the significance of this good sirs, good madams. hopefully you realize that this is not just clever word play. hopefully you see that, actually, engagement subsumes the self. from the single, fleeting consideration, to the communal movements of society. now what is the self really? surely it is the observation of activity. filterable, and accessible through association. and accessible only in particular moments. then gone again to exist only as fragments, or associated perceptual overlays that are increasingly subsumed by the increasingly engaged mind. so naturally, the self concept gets tossed around by waves of engagement. that is, there is some activity, and then later an approximation. you make a move, then form a relative approximation of that move. naturally. this is how we define ourselves. engage. define. repeat. now, engagement in the observation of activity is simple. it occurs, mechanically, naturally. it is the i process. that much we understand. but it is perhaps a little too abstract for some of us to consider the continuum of engagement in regard to the observation of perception. have you ever considered the continuum of engagement in the observation of perception? that is, we see what happens to the self when there is engagement on the level of activity, which is the i process, but what about the level of apprehension? perception? that is, what is the result of increased engagement in the observation of perception, and not activity? and it matters not whether that activity occurs in environment or thought, it is still activity. so then sir, what is the result of increasing engagement into the observation of perception?
  3. so then we see that both the COCK and the MIND collect residue. and that they must be washed clean of this residue to find communion for both hand relief and perception. so then madam, let us wash our MINDCOCKs clean of KRISHNAMURTI. KRISHNAMURTI was a handsome, articulate pussy monger, but nothing more! so who cares about KRISHNAMURTI! especially when reality is right in front of us! the only thing we must do is get through the forrest of preconception that is subjectivity. and that is what the speaker hopes to communicate to you madam. that is, the METACONCEPT the unveils reality in perception. sirs, a question has been put: what is baseline identity, relative to engagement? put differently, does engagement distort identity in perception? is it a continuum? that is, at one end there is the unengaged mind, which naturally becomes concerned with defining its relative position, and at the other end is the mind that is fully immersed in some activity. now, is the mind that is fully immersed in the activity concerned with defining itself relative to things? put differently, is there the self when there is engagement? @Thel, POWOTE,@DindetteNuffin? sirs and sirsettes? IS THERE THE SELF WHEN THERE IS ENGAGEMENT?
  4. indeed. now sir, what happens when one evaluates and approximates themselves in this way? that is, labelling the self as he who swings between or is either the cynic and the mystic. what happens then? surely sir, the result is the same for the mystic as it is for the cynic, in that both exist only as labelled time, which is associated memory. put differently, an approximation of the self is an effort to describe what is dead, which is time, time is gone, succeeded always by creativity. so to approximate the self is an effort to describe what is not, and so will always lead to confusion/conflict/duality. is that not it sir? now sir, can there be meditation outside of practice? outside of repetition? outside of becoming?
  5. what the speaker is suggesting is that creativity, and not relative creativity, not creative capacity, but instead the mechanical movement of creativity, can only come about, when the mind is not bogged down by the impulses of previous successes or failures. put differently, creativity - which is the movement of originality and not mimicry - only comes about when the mind is not impeded by thought. thought is the past. and so to see what is actual, which is the creative unfolding of reality, there cannot be patterns or constraints. alternatively put; reality is creativity. and reality which is creativity is not experienced when there is expectation. now, what divides the patterns and constraints from technical knowledge sir? surely that is the next question.
  6. sir, does not pursuing the parrot of another disembowel the parrot of one's MINDCOCK? that is, the moment one walks with predetermination, idealism, beliefs, tradition, mimicry, is, to the speaker, the moment creativity stops. is that not it sir? perhaps we could go into it?
  7. is this it madam?
  8. That's it sir! You see! It is not the speaker that changes, but rather ones approximation, ones definition. The speaker is neither real nor fake. The speaker is.
  9. Sir, we are getting to it.
  10. First KRISHNAMURTI then psychedelics! By jove sir, be careful, you could go mad! You must first equip yourself with a mechanical understanding of the I process. Then, dissolve it with a psychedelic, then, the psychedelic will wear off, but since you understand the pathway, and walked it, you will be able to follow it back without the drug. That is how to make sense of egotism and psychedelics sir.
  11. oh that's it sir! to find actuality one cannot look with preconception! oh by jove sir, that's it! you see! now, can you say it without authority? that is, can you say it without repeating the buddha? without mimicking any of the holy books? if you can sing without authority then that song is coming from your heart, and you are not merely a gramophone, a parrot. so one cannot look to authority for truth. for in authority there is only more preconception.
  12. @DindetteNuffin, madam, this is not a joke! perhaps you and KRISHNAMURTI will ignore the MINDCOCK, but not the speaker! no no. the speaker is looking to end all conflict. and to do so, there must be awareness of all of the permutations of thought! that is, all of the arrangements of ideas, from the prominent to the obscure. and we all do this madam. that is, we all arrange our pool of ideas from the applicable, to the irrelevant. from the notable, to the subtle. that is, in each moment, relative to our environment, our thoughts are arranged by focus. now, the thoughts that are out of focus do not go away. no no. they are there just unhighlighted. cumulatively, these thoughts, these ideas, compose the self concept. perhaps this is a little too abstract, hmm madam? instead, try a little experiment.. write down on a piece of paper, 'where is my identity?' and paste it somewhere you are sure to see it while you begin something enjoyable, a puzzle, giving hand relief, nintendo etc. then, when you find yourself completely immersed in the activity, you will accidentally read your question: where is my identity? and then you will find out the reality of this thing. that is, you will find out what happens to the identity, when it is deprioritized. try it madam! and try it sirs! then, tell the speaker if there is identity in the moment of immersion.
  13. may we go into it sir?
  14. so then if god is what is, then any tradition, any method, any organized religious practice, will only lead further away. so then the only way to find actuality, or god, is not to add, but to negate patterns, preconceptions, ideals, and so on. when perception is free of the restrictions of time, then one knows actuality. edible cannabis preparations should be used with caution, and KRISHNAMURTI.
  15. to the speaker god is love, not religion, not tradition. and love or god exist outside of identity. now, what most of us consider to be love is not love but rather identification as a means of achieving relative security. love/god is not confined by self interest. now sirs, have you ever experienced real love? pope brent mydland explains below: