The Greatest Movie Ever Made

14 views
Skip to first unread message

Jeffrey Angelson

unread,
May 23, 2026, 6:23:56 AMMay 23
to diehar...@googlegroups.com

Why do non-dual teachers point to direct seeing?


How much of reality do we actually perceive?


Very little.


Life is mystery.


Thought tries to know it.


Explain it.


Hold it.


But can thought ever know life?


Or is thought itself another appearance within life?


Perhaps direct seeing is not about seeing reality more clearly.


It is about discovering what is aware of reality.


What knows this moment?


What knows thought?


What knows joy… fear… beauty… confusion?


Many traditions pointed toward this:


Know thyself.


Not knowing more.


Knowing THAT which knows.


THAT which is always here.


Always present.


Always unique.


How do we see THIS?


If attention shifts from what is there to what is looking — what is discovered?


What I notice is not a fixed thing.


Not something solid.


More like something constantly moving, morphing, shape-shifting.


Alive.


Present before thought describes it.


Not something merely observed.


Something inseparable from observing itself.


Always here.


Always changing.


Always THIS.


And life?


Who cares if we can fully explain it?


It may be the greatest movie ever.


Nonstop.


Never repeating.


Beauty. Loss. Wonder. Love.


Talk about a thriller.



Jeff Angelson

Rani Madhavapeddi

unread,
May 23, 2026, 7:22:50 PMMay 23
to diehar...@googlegroups.com, diehar...@googlegroups.com
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Diehard Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to diehard-grou...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAAUbiCQcMpFB%2BYwHc5yXU-_bu4jXhtNWHawV4YFY2SB44ByuFg%40mail.gmail.com.

Rob MacDonald

unread,
May 23, 2026, 8:44:19 PMMay 23
to diehar...@googlegroups.com
I am wondering about this portion:

"How much of reality do we actually perceive?

Very little."

How do we know what we cannot perceive?  How do we know there is more than 'this'?

How do we define reality?  Is reality what we observe right here, right now?  Or is it something different?  Does 'reality' require knowing?

For instance, when I am on the phone with my Mom or Dad, they are both 'real' in that moment.  But when I hang up the phone, are they still real to me when I am not thinking about them?  Maybe between phone calls one of them passes away - are they less real when their body dies?  Surely I will no longer be able to call them, but they are accessible in memory... so, still a part of my 'reality'?  Are the products of my imagination 'real', then?  How about night time dreams?

I sit a few miles from the ocean - below the surface of the water there are likely fish swimming below the surface, but how 'real' are they to me?  The assumption is based on previous experiences of the ocean. 

There is no specific logic I am trying to convey in the above.  I can sit here and talk about a galaxy light years away as being 'real' but what is the use if it is not accessible or knowable somehow?  On the flipside, does the thought of some far off galaxy make it immediately real to me? In that case, I know everything about reality, because even the abstract galaxy is an idea. 

Just pondering out loud.... 

-Rob M. 



To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/27B496E9-17AE-46B7-AE0D-5DC2FCC03726%40gmail.com.

Jeffrey Angelson

unread,
May 24, 2026, 7:16:04 AMMay 24
to diehar...@googlegroups.com

Rani, Rob and All,


Beautiful article, Rani. And Rob, your pondering lands for me.


I wonder if this points to why we can think and discuss reality endlessly and still never quite arrive.


Thought is part of life. Memory is part of life. Imagination is part of life. They help us navigate experience.


But perhaps what I attempt here to point to cannot be reached by thought because thought itself appears afterward.


Pre-thought.


Direct experiencing.


The sound before “bird.”


The color before “sky.”


The sensation before “fear” or “joy.”


Our senses already show us only a sliver of what is happening. We know there are wavelengths we cannot see, sounds we cannot hear, processes occurring beyond perception.


Reality itself may not change.


But our experience of reality appears through conditioning, memory, language, sensory limitations, and the conceptual frameworks we inherit.


We experience reality through a tridimensional body and conditioned mind.


We infer dimensions beyond immediate perception.


Perhaps what we call the Absolute is not something hidden elsewhere, but something too Total to be captured by the apparatus attempting to know it.


How then could thought — arriving afterward and organizing experience into concepts — grasp the Totality?


We can intuit. We can wonder. We can believe.


But perhaps that is why traditions point beyond words.


“The Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao.”


The moment we fully put it into words, we have already stepped into thought.


Not wrong.


Just not the Totality.




Jeff Angelson

Paul Rezendes

unread,
May 24, 2026, 8:34:03 AMMay 24
to Diehards google
Rob, M.

Is everything that ever happened, like your parents, for instance, is that you happening now? Would you exist without everything that ever happened in the way it happened? Does being you feel real? If you feel real, is everything else that ever happened being you real?

Just wondering and chuckling.

Paul







On May 23, 2026, at 8:44 PM, Rob MacDonald <rjma...@gmail.com> wrote:

I am wondering about this portion:

"How much of reality do we actually perceive?

Very little."

How do we know what we cannot perceive?  How do we know there is more than 'this'?

How do we define reality?  Is reality what we observe right here, right now?  Or is it something different?  Does 'reality' require knowing?

For instance, when I am on the phone with my Mom or Dad, they are both 'real' in that moment.  But when I hang up the phone, are they still real to me when I am not thinking about them?  Maybe between phone calls one of them passes away - are they less real when their body dies?  Surely I will no longer be able to call them, but they are accessible in memory... so, still a part of my 'reality'?  Are the products of my imagination 'real', then?  How about night time dreams?

I sit a few miles from the ocean - below the surface of the water there are likely fish swimming below the surface, but how 'real' are they to me?  The assumption is based on previous experiences of the ocean. 

There is no specific logic I am trying to convey in the above.  I can sit here and talk about a galaxy light years away as being 'real' but what is the use if it is not accessible or knowable somehow?  On the flipside, does the thought of some far off galaxy make it immediately real to me? In that case, I know everything about reality, because even the abstract galaxy is an idea. 

Just pondering out loud.... 

-Rob M. 



On Sat, May 23, 2026 at 7:22 PM Rani Madhavapeddi <rmadha...@gmail.com> wrote:
This is a good review of what advaita is.

Jeffrey Angelson

unread,
May 24, 2026, 9:05:42 AMMay 24
to diehar...@googlegroups.com
Rob Paul

Paul, yes. Parents, conditioning, history — all tied into this showing up. I get that.

What I’m trying to point to is something a bit different. Thought can understand things about life, but sometimes it can also get in the way of seeing things directly. We call a tree “tree” and that’s useful. But maybe something else quietly slips away too.

Not that thought is separate from THIS. Thought is part of it too. I’m just wondering whether reality — or maybe direct experience — is always bigger and richer than what thought can fully capture.

Oy. 🙂




Jeff Angelson

Paul Rezendes

unread,
May 24, 2026, 9:42:39 AMMay 24
to Diehards google
Jeff,

I hope it didn't sound like I was contradicting what you or what Rob M. were saying. That was not my intention. I was mostly kidding around, having some fun with how I see things.

On a more serious note to address your ponderings: It seems to me that we are constantly creating our reality according to our senses. What we experience is not what it is without us being who we are. When I walk into the forest, it is what it is because I am who I am. My senses are creating the experience of the forest. I don't know what the forest is outside my senses. And the forest changes its reality according to the observer and the senses that are experiencing it. So we seem to live in this field of waves or vibrations that different senses are interpreting in different ways. So yes, it seems to me there's so much that we don't know except for what our senses perceive and know. The observer is the observed. When a tree falls in the forest and there is no one there to hear it, did it make a sound?

Paul
















Jeffrey Angelson

unread,
May 24, 2026, 10:05:17 AMMay 24
to diehar...@googlegroups.com
Paul Everyone

Paul,


I didn’t take what you said as criticism at all. I enjoyed where you went with it.


I think where I get confused sometimes is around THIS and direct seeing.


If our senses shape experience and thought names it, I keep wondering what THIS is that so many traditions point toward. God. Brahman. Ein Sof. The unborn.


Maybe I should take my own advice and stop looking for an answer to what THIS is because perhaps it isn’t a thing to know or grasp.


Words seem inadequate.



Jeff Angelson

Paul Rezendes

unread,
May 24, 2026, 11:36:38 AMMay 24
to Diehards google
Jeff,

About direct seeing: here is a metaphor that I feel points to direct seeing. Say you are lost in thought. All of a sudden there is an awakening or a direct seeing that you are lost in thought. There is no one deciding to wake up to the fact you are lost in thought; it happened by itself. There is a direct seeing that is immediately its own action, which is, waking up to the fact you were lost and thought. It had nothing to do with someone doing something. In the same way, there can be a waking up to being lost in the identification as the thinker of the thought. The thinker doesn't wake up, but there is a direct seeing or awareness revealing the fact that the thinker of the thought is thought being lost in itself, believing it's something it really isn’t. So that direct seeing puts thought in its place. Wei Wu Wei, action without an actor.

Paul






Jeffrey Angelson

unread,
May 24, 2026, 12:47:03 PMMay 24
to diehar...@googlegroups.com

Paul,


Thank you. I think what you are pointing to is helping clarify something for me.


If attention moves away from thought about experience and into immediate experiencing, there can be a noticing of sensation directly, aliveness directly, constant movement and change, no fixed boundaries, no obvious separation, and something always present without effort.


Not thought analyzing life.


Life revealing itself before thought organizes it.


What strikes me from what you wrote is that direct seeing is not someone doing something. Not a thinker figuring itself out. Not someone accomplishing awareness.


There is simply seeing.


Recognition appearing.


And perhaps that seeing means thought is seen for what it is — a useful tool, but perhaps not how THIS is directly known.


If THIS is directly known at all, perhaps it is not known by standing apart from it, defining it, or grasping it, but by being it.

Oy 😊


Jeff Angelson

Paul Rezendes

unread,
May 24, 2026, 2:55:27 PMMay 24
to Diehards google
Jeff,

Yes, what I find interesting about this is: There is no one to take credit for the direct seeing or awakening. No one accomplishes it. Awareness is seeing that I don't see. It was already there when I was born. I didn't achieve it or accomplish it. We are all born with it. Not something we obtain or accomplish.

Paul

Paul Rezendes Photography
3833 Bearsden Road
Royalston, MA 01368-9400
USA

Photography
Check out our new rotating images on our home page: http://www.paulrezendes.com

Search Online Photo Library:  https://www.agpix.com/results.php?agid=PaRe12
Videos 
















Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages