Quantum Physics Reveals What the Body Really Is

[Rani Madhavapeddi]

Willow,
Does this answer your question?
Rani


https://youtube.com/shorts/BY86FI1qQHk?si=6MhfsvehcGvCgr3t

Rani Madhavapeddi Patel

[Jeffrey Angelson]

Rani, Paul, Dan All

This video describes the way I see it. The question is how do Buddhists see it. I felt that the field talked about here that we are a part of is emptiness. Paul educated me to realize that the Buddhist don’t see emptiness that way emptiness  is not substantial. So is there an analogy we can make in Buddhism?

--
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/312AAAD7-A49D-4F95-B423-C8B0F75BCE23%40gmail.com.

[Rani Madhavapeddi]

Jeffrey,

The Budhists when they talk about emptiness, they talk about emptiness that arises with no identification of the body/ mind complex. They also say while it is empty of the self there is an interconnectedness to everything else. In Advaita Vedanta what they say is that interconnectedness or singularity is ‘completeness’ or fullness. So they are talking about 2 sides of the same coin. 

That’s my 2 cents. 

Rani Madhavapeddi Patel

On Sep 18, 2025, at 8:05 AM, Jeffrey Angelson <jeff.a...@gmail.com> wrote:



To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAAUbiCSRcvaOk45Jy_SfT-n_W0KA5KAAD9H9zS9G5iSJcw2%2BkQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Jeffrey Angelson]

The difference is that in Advaita it’s Awareness ( Brahman) there’s a sense of permanence 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/B894ADA9-DD4B-46D6-A2C4-BF5800A3372B%40gmail.com.

[Rani Madhavapeddi]

Jeffrey,

There is an awareness in both. Who is aware of the emptiness of the self? 

Rani Madhavapeddi Patel

On Sep 18, 2025, at 8:41 AM, Jeffrey Angelson <jeff.a...@gmail.com> wrote:



To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAAUbiCR1pW%2BQppmS0Y_cfTmtpwshOJbbyiQCrEif7RtqnXsd4w%40mail.gmail.com.

[Jeffrey Angelson]

Emptiness collapses into awareness but the awareness is not substantial. It’s basically emptiness knowing itself. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/2F28CF4B-4148-414D-BE1C-22AC85B6728F%40gmail.com.

[Rob MacDonald]

My 2 cents.... I think for many when they read, "awareness" because there is a selfish awareness in this place, it is impossible to conceptualize an awareness outside of self when the "I-me-mine" is no longer here.  Even if we can give the mind the slip momentarily through various ways, we always come back to relating this as this perspective of selfhood.

It's sort of like how many religious traditions put an emphasis on this human experience, continuing as a soul after death, or something that carries karma from one life to another, instead of the other way around where there is an eternal field or energy or unity that happens to arise as a human, a bird, a cloud, a rock, etc., etc., etc.  Instead of saying we are a part of this emptiness, is it closer to say that everything arises from, and descends back into this emptiness? 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAAUbiCQFrL6%2BkYrzjx-M8O3etGdkHFPG%2B4qgdnjsBAxmSqoS7Q%40mail.gmail.com.

[Rani Madhavapeddi]

Yes that’s how I see it. The screen and the movie, movement in the non moving fullness in the emptiness. Duality collapses. It’s interesting that Fannigan talks about this. In quantum bits there is no particular form and in classical bits there is a form. The no form makes computers move faster. 

Let me attach this to the email. 

https://youtube.com/shorts/BY86FI1qQHk?si=feJdwg_uuJ2m6m9D

Love peace and joy

I resonate a lot with this guy. He had an awakening ! 

Rani Madhavapeddi Patel

On Sep 18, 2025, at 11:25 AM, Rob MacDonald <rjma...@gmail.com> wrote:



To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAN6ZE8%2B%3D9JzMHZN4Lus0zN%2Bq%2Bovp60HXuHcUmtEskjovJRXhtQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Rani Madhavapeddi]

But are they separate? 

Rani Madhavapeddi Patel

On Sep 18, 2025, at 11:14 AM, Jeffrey Angelson <jeff.a...@gmail.com> wrote:



To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAAUbiCQFrL6%2BkYrzjx-M8O3etGdkHFPG%2B4qgdnjsBAxmSqoS7Q%40mail.gmail.com.

[Jeffrey Angelson]

They aren’t separate but still unlike Advaita there is no thing to define is as eternal , never born etc. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/00E26136-D0B9-49DF-A387-AC1EA63EEF65%40gmail.com.

[Rob MacDonald]

Rani,

"I" don't know. 🙂

What arises is "No".  There is no judgment of any interpretation of what appears to be happening here.  Only a gentle pointing that as a human, also having the human experience, I see a lot of suffering when people think about a soul, or karma, or heaven / hell, or cosmic realms...  What seems to cause suffering is this sense of self.  What craves eternal justice for those humans among us doing despicable things is this sense of self.  What hopes that this life as a visually impaired person will yield to another life as a person who can see 20/10, play professional baseball, or become a medical doctor, sense of self....

There is no separation, only restriction / blinders / limitation.  I like to think that after death there is a unity, and this limited perspective is shed and whatever illuminates this body once again is returned to that limitless field of all possibilities that Knows what it is like to be blind/sighted, man/woman, love/hate, singing bird / screaming missile... 

From those that have had NDEs, there is seems to be some that come back and say they had access to 'all knowledge' or when they purport to have life reviews they don't just experience their perspective, they experience the perspectives or all involved.  That still scares me a little, but thinking about it now it shines like a beacon of Truth, because it shows that:
1.) We are all connected
2.) What we do to others, we do to ourselves, because there is only the appearance of separation

3.) Maybe that is 'Hell', having to feel deeply that pain you caused others?

Just riffing now... LOL.

Again, I rest easy knowing how little I know. 😄❤️.  

Peace,
Rob

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/00E26136-D0B9-49DF-A387-AC1EA63EEF65%40gmail.com.

[Paul Rezendes]

Everyone on this thread,

I've been reading all the emails in this thread and I'm totally confused as to what people are talking about. It seems to me there is some confusion about what Buddhists mean by emptiness. Maybe I just don't have it right. This guy Fannigan also says we have free will. All because he said he had an awakening doesn't mean he had an awakening.

I really don't know what else to say. It just all left me confused as to what we're talking about.

Paul

PS: I was noticing that some people are not signing their names to their posts and sometimes it's hard for people to know whose emails are whose. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAAUbiCQFrL6%2BkYrzjx-M8O3etGdkHFPG%2B4qgdnjsBAxmSqoS7Q%40mail.gmail.com.

[Rob MacDonald]

Apologies, Paul, and everyone.  I probably responded too far off topic from the video clip.

Didn't mean to muddy the waters.

Peace,
Rob M.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/5BDD7324-0F34-4200-B3E4-23C85B2B430A%40paulrezendes.com.

[Rani Madhavapeddi]

Jeffrey,

Advaita does not describe it as it says it is beyond the mind. It points to that which cannot be known by the mind. The word they used for pointing is Brahman. It is not something that can be described. That’s why advaita says the guru can lead you to an understanding that there is something within you that is ever present and in which everything rises and falls. That which does not rise or fall  is you. That which arises and falls is in time and space experiencing. Having understood that the inward journey is entirely each individuals’. The ever present energy does the rest as mind cannot do it. 

That’s my 2 cents of advaita. 

Rani Madhavapeddi Patel

On Sep 18, 2025, at 1:02 PM, Paul Rezendes <pho...@paulrezendes.com> wrote:

Everyone on this thread,

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/5BDD7324-0F34-4200-B3E4-23C85B2B430A%40paulrezendes.com.

[Paul Rezendes]

Rob M.

You did not muddy the waters with your last email. I could resonate with some of it. I wrote my email before you wrote the last one you sent.

It seems to me it is very possible that we are being all beings at the same time. At some level, we are living each other's lives. What we do to others, we are doing to ourselves.

Paul

P.S.; I'm not sure this is on target. I'm not sure what it is.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAN6ZE8LJGXNvOwNQsxZotfDB%3DQiJRpGfcJ9sexkVxsW%3DKkOp7g%40mail.gmail.com.

[Rani Madhavapeddi]

Sounds perfect IDK 🤣

Rani Madhavapeddi Patel

On Sep 18, 2025, at 1:14 PM, Paul Rezendes <pho...@paulrezendes.com> wrote:

Rob M.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/DBF940BE-7577-40C3-8D9A-C986FEF4CA3F%40paulrezendes.com.

[Rani Madhavapeddi]

I apologize if I have muddied the still waters. Sometimes when we see them muddied we appreciate the stillness 

My 2 cents😂

I normally don’t go on and on but I did and I am sorry if I have confused anyone. 

Love peace and joy! 

Rani Madhavapeddi Patel

On Sep 18, 2025, at 1:16 PM, Rani Madhavapeddi <rmadha...@gmail.com> wrote:

Sounds perfect IDK 🤣

[Paul Rezendes]

Everyone,

I will put the onus on me. There were a couple of threads that were so intellectual (at least from my perspective,) that I just could not follow them.

Paul

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/1ACD407D-BCB0-4F7B-A22E-32612F1CB453%40gmail.com.

[Dan Kilpatrick]

Paul, Rani and others here on this thread, and not,

I didn't have a sense of where to come in here, and actually Paul's comment about not being sure drew me in. This is because something came up in the middle of last night that goes something like this. It is probably a complete divergence from what is here, but here goes.

Do we actually know that we don't know? Do we know what we don't know? This is getting at our knowing. Is there an actual knowing that continues? Is our not knowing known to us? Or is not knowing something that exists only in the moment now? A realizing, revealing, understanding that is not 'ours'? Knowing as used here, to me implies a knower, one that stands outside of what it knows and says it knows. This knowing exists in/as psychological time.

I realize that knowing is used in other ways, so just wanting to make the distinction. Knowing might also point to this revealing, realizing, understanding etc. Is this knowing in any way distinct from awareness? I wonder if our minds tend to make distinctions that only seem to be distinctions (between awareness and revealing etc). When we truly say (that is, realize) that we don't know, I wonder if this is awareness in action. Clarity in ourselves that is undeniable. This knowing is not of or from a knower. It reveals this movement of knowing as a knower for what it is.

This brings back something that happened many years ago. I was sitting in an auditorium full of unfamiliar people, and glancing around taking it all in. After about 20 minutes, I began to notice the sense of knowing certain people coming up in me, as in 'where did I meet that guy before....?'  Nowhere! My mind was creating familiarity out of thin air, simply by taking in certain features and mannerisms etc. Knowing in real-time unfolding itself. What a laugh that was. But this is how our minds create the known unconsciously. Sounds worth being aware of.....  -Dan 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/6FAAECC0-9864-4F79-96FD-6BEAFF9CA772%40paulrezendes.com.

[Willow]

Rani, Dan, Paul, et al

Rani, to answer your question:

No… 🤓

Logic, science, theories and ideas have little to no role in what is being pointed to..

‘Knowing’ as Dan alludes, refers to something that is too immediate to be grasped by thought. Thought without realizing it, is the knowing it is trying to know… or the understanding it is trying to understand.

Why is that? Is it because thoughts cannot think?

In the view here, ‘Knowing, Brahman, Emptiness, Awareness” are mental objects trying to point to object-lessness which is also subject-less, which is at the exact same time being subject and object. A conundrum that can only be solved by ‘itself’ through insight or intuition..

This, in my view is why I think spiritual practices are designed to fail and in that failure destroy the practitioner in order for the revealing to be revealed.. 

At least that seems to be one of the ways..

💜, Willow

[Paul Rezendes]

Willow,

I just had to chime in here. I really appreciated your email below. Thanks for your input.

Paul

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/ee9acaae-698f-4c8f-a65c-ada7d4ecc99en%40googlegroups.com.

[Jonathan Pierce]

“This, in my view is why I think spiritual practices are designed to fail and in that failure destroy the practitioner in order for the revealing to be revealed“

Points

Jonathan

[Dan Kilpatrick]

Willow,

I concur with Paul and Jonathan's comments about your comments. What hits me now in reading it again is this is pointing to the way of no way, which is simultaneously all ways. This thing we call life simply can't be defined, nor how it moves. This is the beauty of living. So even when someone says there is a particular way, or even only one way, this is also life moving. Living is free to move and awaken to itself in any moment or circumstance, without being able to know this. The beauty lies in not needing to know....  -Dan

--

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/8F4EB4B6-9DFA-42FE-A288-FD5C7A385048%40gmail.com.

[Willow]

Paul, Dan, Jonathan, et al

💜

Willow

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Diehard Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/diehard-group/16gHxr1339o/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to diehard-grou...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAGgGDoDkpkuu1bXu8f95ZNk6X3%2BB%3DnJXh7RJF283seDuS7-fOg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Rob LO]

Sorry Willow, Diehards

But if ... in the view there 

In the view here, ‘Knowing, Brahman, Emptiness, Awareness” are mental objects trying to point to object-lessness which is also subject-less, which is at the exact same time being subject and object. A conundrum that can only be solved by ‘itself’ through insight or intuition..

Then "solved"; "insight" and "intuition" are also just as meaningless and unknowable and also mental objects or concepts too ... 

🤔🤦‍♂️

Rob L-O

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAD8GupYcip16Z0QgKrw2MbXWK8kJyO5QainSdmOMq7KnAQnJsQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Janet Asiain]

Rob, Willow, Paul, Dan, Diehards,

Aren’t all these words (aka mental constructs) just consciousness’ attempts to explain (or speculate about) the inexplicable? Is that what Paul was intending by bringing up the paths of religions? 

It seems that at some point even the most committed consciousness may see the futility and stop “needing to know.” Is that when what Dan describes becomes one’s state of being? 

Just trying to understand the messages right here on the Diehards thread is challenging enough!

Janet

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAPa3K%2B7sys6GyOf4tvMznj72nT9n%2BZhHoob9KoLiEH4dO%2BP4Xw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Paul Rezendes]

Everyone,

Some interesting points being made here by Janet and Rob. If I may suggest what it seems to be being pointed to here is the fact that we turn everything into things. But there is also the realization that the words and the things are just as real as anything else. Simply put, emptiness is form and form is emptiness. The “nothingness" is as much the “somethingness" as the "somethingness is as much the nothingness. Object/subject does not exist by itself, but coexists.

Nothing new there. I think that's what most people are saying in different ways.

Paul

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAGdKTP6cGZBuCcH4Ot2s3kRPDYpH%2BYFsXFNQCajtwk4gUwMJNQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Willow]

Rob L O, et al

Absolutely correct… now what?

💜, Willow

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAPa3K%2B7sys6GyOf4tvMznj72nT9n%2BZhHoob9KoLiEH4dO%2BP4Xw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Dan Kilpatrick]

Rob L,

Is the forming of concepts, and the sense of meaninglessness, in real time, without a subject or object?

-Dan

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAD8GupaqJZgLyq-hNz1WvdD%3Db5Me3f3JTE98g38OEJEDCOR2Zg%40mail.gmail.com.

[inca...@gmail.com]

What if subject and object coexist only in mind, i.e. in thinking? 

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 28, 2025, at 9:49 PM, Dan Kilpatrick <kilp...@gmail.com> wrote:



To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAGgGDoCR-43H_qLRn_%3Dxxi3j9zbbqhUcPMpQ0RWPPTePbazy8Q%40mail.gmail.com.

[Dan Kilpatrick]

Does even the experiencing of there being a subject and object have a subject or object? Or is it all simply experiencing? The mind can't find an answer to this, can it? But to simply look at what is going on in it, not abstractly but actually, in the experiencing as it is happening.....  -Dan

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/32B86BE0-3454-40CF-85F1-D88C51538FA0%40gmail.com.

[Paul Rezendes]

Everyone,

I'm really resonating with the last several emails that came in. I remember Sunhee saying, I think on the Thursday night Zoom group, something like, "there is no subject object in the first place, so how can they be co-arising?" I had to laugh at that, it was perfect. Sounds like that quite a few of us are on the same page here with this.

Paul

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAGgGDoBhuHt9bZr5GQsQt9R%2B2NCg8u_afKHendxUFgrqw35RTQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Dan Kilpatrick]

Paul and Everyone,

Thanks for sharing what Sunhee said, it resonates here as well. Perhaps we could say that what arises is the experiencing of subject/object. Nonduality as the experiencing of duality.....

-Dan

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/54397E81-16F5-4B95-AF7E-92608140CD4F%40paulrezendes.com.

[Paul Rezendes]

Dan,

Yes, seems like that several of us are sharing an understanding here.

Paul 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAGgGDoCuYSy9waOtbWa7N8oGh11OB4u8Kiw3swPSd%2BwCTYJ8_A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Jeffrey Angelson]

Paul Dan Everyone

I think it’s important to realize that these prior discussions of self are based on a Buddhist perspective. There is no permanent, independent self. What we call “I” is a temporary aggregation of five skandhas (body, feelings, perceptions, mental formations, consciousness). This stems from the fact that there is no creator or god in Buddhism. When the Buddha was asked how things began he said we don’t know. Therefore we don’t know what we are either. So self is a construct or like a thought. We can experience subject( self) and object. As separate or together. I don’t under why it matters from a Buddhist perspective. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/4BE912D7-FD8D-4F80-8735-13EBBB997F8B%40paulrezendes.com.

[Dan Kilpatrick]

Jeffrey and All,

One question: can we experience nonduality, or is the experiencing itself nonduality? I remember a scientist I was participating with speaking about how scientists could stimulate the brain in certain ways to produce the experience of oneness. What came from me was that oneness/nonduality (what you will) is never an experience. It is the very experiencing itself, whatever its seeming "content". But there really doesn't seem to be a content separate from the experiencing, the seeming content is the experiencing itself. Experiencing, in this sense, has no bounds as to its nature. 

There is never anything separate from experiencing that is being experienced, I guess this is the point here.  -Dan

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAAUbiCS_STNDVkrP%2B-OwxG2iS9O7A8_BRqd%2B937bMx4iV1TFZQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Dan Kilpatrick]

Sorry, I would like to add:  what we might experience as nonduality etc may be the falling away or collapsing of duality. I don't think there are any words for this. Maybe just awake.....  -Dan

[Jeffrey Angelson]

Dan and All

I can understand what you are saying here by recognizing 

Realization arises not from positing a single, unchanging reality, but from the insight that “all phenomena have one nature, which is no-nature” due to their emptiness. 

Yet there are times my experience doesn’t feel this way. Paul has said as you do that there is no experience of Oness. If “That” is Non Dual why is it that we experience things as if we are separate. Why don’t we experience reality. Why the illusion of separation? Are you saying that some of us, perhaps you, no longer experience separation?

How then did you overcome all the conditioning?

On Mon, Sep 29, 2025 at 1:57 PM Dan Kilpatrick <kilp...@gmail.com> wrote:

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAGgGDoAG4_P8dtKq_VxwqX%2B01hoXgCyKg0EEWEzZyoTuV-jLYg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Jeffrey Angelson]

Ah..Thanks Dan

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAGgGDoDu2thyJsiAbaBraQmvt6uwqYUwu-gLe1QmFe40EKoWMg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Willow]

Yes Dan, 

Fabulous question/pointer;

“Does even the experiencing of there being a subject and object have a subject or object?”

💜, Willow 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAGgGDoBhuHt9bZr5GQsQt9R%2B2NCg8u_afKHendxUFgrqw35RTQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Dan Kilpatrick]

Jeffrey, Willow, All,

Jeffrey, here might be the thing. Can anyone define what might be experienced until it has come into being? If duality arises within us, this is our experiencing, right? So it seems to me that living is a matter that can't defined as an experience, as I believe you are saying. Living is the very experiencing. It might be a matter of whether this experiencing is apparent for what it is, never separate from ourselves, even if the experiencing is that of being separate. 

I recall reading that Krishnamurti experienced sorrow as he was being taken to the hospital for the final time. In this, he was overheard to say: "Oh, sorrow, I thought I had lost you". In other words, nothing was saying sorrow should never arise. It was simply embraced for what it was, not separate from him. The absence of separateness does not depend on what arises. Its absence is not an experience, it is just in the nature of everything. Not attainable, since it already is.....  Can we experience absence?

Willow, 💜.

-Dan

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAD8GupbaaDz7qqJQEOTHqn9kWPvwNha48cgWhDtNsxRwNMNFUQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Rene]

Hi Dan and all,

In realization who is realizing and would that realized be realization? Can realization be experienced if known? 

Wondering,

Rene Salazar

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAGgGDoDywxB2s25f3kdyJcJYr8aF8ZM8-H_QXQzduoToGZhONA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Paul Rezendes]

Dan,

I haven't read the other emails that came in after the one you sent in that are below my email here. But it stopped me in my tracks. That's because I thought it was so well articulated. I really appreciate it.

Paul

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAGgGDoAG4_P8dtKq_VxwqX%2B01hoXgCyKg0EEWEzZyoTuV-jLYg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Dan Kilpatrick]

Rene, All,

Rene, thanks. I think the wording in all this can get difficult since we might use words differently and we are speaking about unspeakability. But your questions actually touch on something that was just coming up to me in all this inquiring here, at least as I receive them. To me, realizing is like waking up to something, such as something we have lived with or in for most of our lives. And this waking up is action itself. It is always now....  We are affected/altered, yet this action is not an experience. An experience involves an experiencer, something separate from the experience. This is what falls away in this action, the collapsing of being separate. But in a wordless way that these words cannot capture. Action is wordless.....

This action requires no foreknowledge and really leaves no residue (as an experience). Yet we are changed in ways we may not fully appreciate, and there may be an informing. For example, we never may have needed to be concerned about ourselves psychologically speaking. Self-concern arises from feeling separate and isolated, and living may show us this was never the case to begin with, in its wordless action. It is a living, vivid, wordless informing in which there is no time. It can't be continued, yet everything is changed. And we have absolutely nothing to do with this realizing/action....   -Dan

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAPGEE-UOKJo30dCo60gKmotK6t3Hj2uK4RLN6ghhf-m7DkFy4A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Dan Kilpatrick]

Thank you Paul. I'm not sure which email(s) you meant, I've sent in so many here of late! Not sure what's going on......  -Dan

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/2F6CD67C-508C-480A-AF31-174B4BD51D34%40paulrezendes.com.

[Paul Rezendes]

Jeffrey and all,

I know some people claim they have experiences of oneness/wholeness. In my opinion, people can have all kinds of experiences. Just take some LSD and you're be able to have profound experiences of oneness. I have had those experiences. They come and go like every other experience. Separateness can only exist because of the rest of life showing up that way. Separateness can't exist by itself. There's no such thing as anything existing by itself. At least that's how it seems from here, like Dan said:  this experience now is wholeness.

Paul

Paul Rezendes Photography

3833 Bearsden Road

Royalston, MA 01368-9400

USA

Tel: 978 249-8810

pho...@paulrezendes.com

http://www.paulrezendes.com

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

Drone Photos: http://www.agpix.com/results.php?agid=PaRe12&keyword=drone

Videos 

On Vimeo: https://vimeo.com/user84556629

On YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCO0dHJqaQ7irSCKZSTBmSaQ

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAAUbiCS_STNDVkrP%2B-OwxG2iS9O7A8_BRqd%2B937bMx4iV1TFZQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Rani Madhavapeddi]

Thanks Paul for the recall. This is where I see the similarity between Buddhism (sunyata/emptiness) , Kashmiri Shaivism (Sunyata /emptiness and pure advaita. No one born or no one dying. My 2 cents. 

💜✌️😂

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/54397E81-16F5-4B95-AF7E-92608140CD4F%40paulrezendes.com.

[Paul Rezendes]

Dan,

This is the email I was referring to:

Jeffrey and All,

One question: can we experience nonduality, or is the experiencing itself nonduality? I remember a scientist I was participating with speaking about how scientists could stimulate the brain in certain ways to produce the experience of oneness. What came from me was that oneness/nonduality (what you will) is never an experience. It is the very experiencing itself, whatever its seeming "content". But there really doesn't seem to be a content separate from the experiencing, the seeming content is the experiencing itself. Experiencing, in this sense, has no bounds as to its nature. 

There is never anything separate from experiencing that is being experienced, I guess this is the point here.  -Dan

Paul

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAGgGDoBxL7dQfKBWeaD%3D7ZJqPMxk48POQ_GGGMHS_Kdr2FOxQg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Dan Kilpatrick]

Got it, thanks. -Dan

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/221A999E-F1B1-441C-91A0-56404DC92BA5%40paulrezendes.com.

[Rene]

Dan,

I love the point you bring out about self concern, psychologically might not actually have been a necessity at all. This is interesting to look at since the business of waking up or wanting to wake up seems that it is this psychological self concern. I might be wrong here. 

It seems subtler than something thought cann bring in. Then what would bring it if that's a thing. 

Rene Salazar

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAGgGDoC7CLi7ycupXARsE-02nPPBDxnCotLADUYzxV377%3DD0bA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Dan Kilpatrick]

Rene, All,

Rene, I found this really interesting:

This is interesting to look at since the business of waking up or wanting to wake up seems that it is this psychological self concern. I might be wrong here. 

Yes, what hits me is that both might be true at the same time: wanting something out of self-concern, and wanting to wake up out of realizing we are asleep, without knowing what waking up is. Perhaps both can be moving in us without our realizing it. The second might have no personal motive whatsoever, just revealing that we aren't getting it......  

Thanks, -Dan

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAPGEE-Uj8PbLgBD0Z9jNK8yT_apH_4dGCi_Hc6_kR87UNgExZg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Rene]

The not knowing what it is, sounds like a good point as well. There's a suspicion that this might be a so called "sticking point" because if I know what it's supposed to look like or be, then inquiry ceases since then I am chasing my own projection of this "other state". 

However, it seems i couldn't know what "awakening" is nor not know. If that makes any sense. Because all this knowing or not would be in the field of thought. 

Rene Salazar

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAGgGDoDhq4jV2EBEPaXiJ7j-3TJc5WKg486db5t2XKCaj%3DDPmw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Dan Kilpatrick]

Thanks Rene, good point. If it revolves around "me", it's the same movement. It also occurs to me that not knowing might arise as a fact, born out of revealing the falseness of assumed knowing being taken for a fact unconsciously. Some call this revealing knowing. I tend towards an informing or revealing, I guess from the human vantage point. I could have never known I didn't know, as you said, without this revealing.

-Dan

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAPGEE-U42A%2BgVRo5ZbvE51_pBV88G0f0cX4V_49h-ggJB%3DZW3Q%40mail.gmail.com.