Just 2 Cents

19 views
Skip to first unread message

Sunhee Kim

unread,
Feb 1, 2026, 3:47:17 PMFeb 1
to diehar...@googlegroups.com, Diehards google


Whoever likes to read mumble jumble :) 


When one seeks truth or realization, any kind of method—meditation, discussion, Zoom meetings, retreats—can be helpful. A certain level of intellectual understanding may also be useful.


Communication through concepts and ideas does not necessarily need to stop.

However, a possible hindrance is that when one encounters concepts or ideas about Truth, especially from a realized person, the mind tends to grasp them. It tries to understand the pointer, to make sense of it according to one’s own perception. Along the way, there may be insights here and there, but the more the mind tries to understand deeply, the more it seems to replace one idea with another—idea A with idea B.


Instead of dropping all ideas and concepts, or simply seeing them arise and pass away, one may remain caught in the attempt to understand. Seeing ideas exactly as they are can be challenging when there is still a “me” trying to do something with them.


Understanding intellectually that a thought arises from What Is does not mean one clearly knows What Is.

Nor is a part the same as the whole.


Is there anyone who can describe what the Whole looks like? Is the Whole made up of billions of parts/separated entities?


I have heard the analogy of the ocean and the waves. Although I understand it is a metaphor, yet when I look at the ocean, there is only the ocean and its movement. I do not see a separation between the ocean and its movement. Just the way the ocean is..

Appears still or moving…


Still, we label that movement as “waves,” as if waves were separate entities, when they are not. There is just the ocean—nothing else. Yet we objectify it: “that wave is big,” “that one is small,” “this part of the ocean is deeper than another,” and so on.


But does depth or waves matter to the ocean itself?



Thank you 🙏 

Sunhee

On Feb 1, 2026, at 2:07 PM, Paul Rezendes <pho...@paulrezendes.com> wrote:


Janet,

Down deep, I think you already "know" this, but it's not intellectual.

Paul


On Feb 1, 2026, at 2:36 PM, Janet Asiain <janet...@gmail.com> wrote:

In fact I reckon that the only words of others that I do actually “understand” are those that express what I already “know.” J

On Sun, Feb 1, 2026 at 2:34 PM Janet Asiain <janet...@gmail.com> wrote:
Well done, Paul. I understand what you’re saying. I still don’t get “the part is the whole” but that doesn’t seem to matter in the actuality of living! At least not at my level of understanding! Janet A

On Sun, Feb 1, 2026 at 2:10 PM Paul Rezendes <pho...@paulrezendes.com> wrote:
Janet,

Maybe you understand it more than you think. If everything is being everything, then nothing can be without everything being what it is. In other words, nothing can exist outside of being in relationship with everything else. Everything depends on everything to be what it is. I hope that doesn't sound like a play on words, for me it isn't. It's actually pointing to something. I'm not trying to teach you something I think you don't know. I think, in some way, it's all already understood.

Paul 

On Feb 1, 2026, at 1:40 PM, Janet Asiain <janet...@gmail.com> wrote:

Paul, Haha! And I thought Bohm was over my head! I don't think I understand a word of what you're saying here. The tables are turned!
What you said about the part being the whole, though, is definitely one of the things Bohm talked about (the hologram, right?) that always baffled me. I know he was making a scientific statement but it sounds like the purest mysticism to me. Beautiful, of course. The farthest I can get with it is that the holographic image is a kind of reflection of the whole. But I don't think that's really the idea. I don't expect you or anyone else to try to explain this to me! Although you are welcome to try.

Dan, Interesting that you felt you had to reassure everyone that your reflections weren't intended as rebuttals. Because they sometimes do tend to have that effect, at least on me. It's actually more like what you say makes everything else sort of irrelevant! This is not intended as a criticism, just an observation. Like I said to Paul, I often barely understand what you write, but I usually like it anyway.

Winter wandering,
Janet

On Sun, Feb 1, 2026 at 1:29 PM Jeffrey Angelson <jeff.a...@gmail.com> wrote:
Jim Everyoe

Thank you, Jim, for sharing your reflections.


In this thread, I notice thoughts, silences, and different ways of being showing up. Perhaps each of these is part of the same unfolding inquiry, appearing differently for each of us.


I wonder how everyone is experiencing this pause — in words, in quiet, in the space between — without needing to resolve or agree.



Jeff Angelson


On Sun, Feb 1, 2026 at 12:46 PM 'JIM PETERSON' via Diehard Group <diehar...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
Hey Paul,
 
Is that what you're feeling?  I hear a sense of loss in your words.  To completely stop communicating via language would be a great loss to me also.  As a clinger, I don't have anything against clinging.  I'm not trying to change what is happening.  The change is what is happening.  I'm saying the conceptualizing can stop sometimes, and and we are just being what is happening.  The explaining and conceptualizing is always there for us to come back to.  We can explore in that way also.  Can't we engage in both without giving up anything?  Is it possible to actually give something up anyway?  
 
Just my current musings.
 
Jim
On 02/01/2026 12:32 PM EST Paul Rezendes <pho...@paulrezendes.com> wrote:
 
 
Jim, Dan, Sunhee,
 
OK, nothing to say? No more emails. No trying to communicate. Is that where we're at now?
 
No use going to zoom meetings or even having the Diehards?
 
Paul
 
On Feb 1, 2026, at 12:19 PM, 'JIM PETERSON' via Diehard Group <diehar...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
Sunhee, Dan, and All,
 
Thank you Sunhee and Dan.  You have said better than I could what is coming up in "me."  What happens when all the conceptualizing "about" stops?  What remains?  We tend to have our pet conceptualizations about "what is."  What if those just fell away?  
 
Okay, time to stop.
 
Jim
On 02/01/2026 12:10 PM EST Dan Kilpatrick <kilp...@gmail.com> wrote:
 
 
Paul, Janet, Everyone,
 
What comes up around this is that before there were any words, any thoughts, expressings etc, around all this, there was never any separation or no separation/wholeness. These contrasts or specifications are brought forth by our human condition, it seems to me. 
 
Separation is more than a word, it is ongoing experiencing. Is this experiencing of being separate, if we look closely, actually separate from anything? Is it separate or even not separate, or is there no such framework present at all? Do these distinctions only come in when we think about it? Do we need to define any of this as being whole or separate when in its midst?
 
This seems to say that the distinctions we make have their meaning but are not capturing what is happening right now (which is themselves). 
 
Sorry for going off here. I don't mean this as a rebuttal to anything, or to say there is anything limiting in speaking about all this (as I often do!). Just looking at it....   -Dan
 

On Sun, Feb 1, 2026 at 11:34 AM Paul Rezendes <pho...@paulrezendes.com> wrote:
Janet and everyone,
 
Yes, it seems to me Bohm was saying the same thing. The part contains the whole. The whole is being the part, or is the part, as the ocean is the wave. There is no separation. Yet there is a separation that is as real as no separation. The whole is the separation. They 'both" exist simultaneously, just like the ocean and the wave. Just my take on it.
 
🕊️ 
Paul
 
 
On Feb 1, 2026, at 11:09 AM, Janet Asiain <janet...@gmail.com> wrote:

I would like to mention David Bohm’s quantum physics more-than-imagery discovery of what he called the implicate and the explicate orders, where the two are never separate. The explicate (manifest) unfolds  from the implicate (silence, ground, what have you) and re-enfolds back into it, where it has effect on what unfolds subsequently.  (Sounds a little like the ocean and the waves, no?) At least that’s what I remember from reading that I only barely managed to understand partially! 
 
Janet A

On Sun, Feb 1, 2026 at 10:58 AM Dan Kilpatrick <kilp...@gmail.com> wrote:
👌

On Sun, Feb 1, 2026, 10:52 AM Paul Rezendes <pho...@paulrezendes.com> wrote:
WOW! Is everything being everything all at once? We cannot stand outside being everything. There is no place to go.
 
Paul
 
 
On Feb 1, 2026, at 10:47 AM, Dan Kilpatrick <kilp...@gmail.com> wrote:

Jeff, just a very short, quick question. What if all the activity is also the presence, all at once?
-Dan

On Sun, Feb 1, 2026, 10:43 AM Jeffrey Angelson <jeff.a...@gmail.com> wrote:
Janet Rani All
 

Wow, both of your reflections really resonate.

 

Janet, I love the idea of silence as a constant backdrop, with words and action erupting only when needed—like a mystic repeating a prayer while moving through life.

 

Rani, your point about action arising without a doer fits beautifully here. Thought can slow it, but life moves seamlessly when we step out of the way.

 

I’m wondering: what if silence is actually holding everything—thought, action, experience—not empty, but sustaining and allowing it all to arise?

 

Rumi said it perfectly: “Silence speaks.” Thought and action are like ripples on the surface of this deep, holding presence—moving, appearing, interacting, yet never separate from the depth beneath.

 

Do others sense this holding presence beneath all activity, or does it feel fleeting?



Jeff Angelson
 

On Sun, Feb 1, 2026 at 9:55 AM Janet Asiain <janet...@gmail.com> wrote:
Nice thread, Jeff/Andy/Paul/Rani. What you describe is penetrating, resonating. And yet how irresistible it is to explain it! Oh well —
 
One little thing: I don’t think it’s intended, but it might be possible for a reader to imagine a sort of multi-tasking operation (think/not think, words/silence, etc/etc). Whoever mentioned simultaneity might have been closer to the actual. 
 
Or is it more that silence can be realized all the time, with speaking/doing only erupting when necessary for physical survival? Analogous to the mystics who repeat the Jesus prayer without cessation, going about life’s activities in the meantime, or as an overlay?
 
Just some speculations, not really important. 
Decorative thought, that’s all. 
 
Janet A
 

On Sun, Feb 1, 2026 at 9:30 AM Rani Madhavapeddi <rmadha...@gmail.com> wrote:
Yes Jeffery,
Love the simple way Rumi put it. 
The seeker disappears in the sought. No individualization. 
All action arises spontaneously without a doer. 
It is our default position and thought is a movement away from that. 
This is why in crises the body jumps into action bypassing the mind. Thought slows spontaneous action. 
Love peace and joy! 
 

Rani Madhavapeddi Patel
 

On Feb 1, 2026, at 4:05 AM, Jeffrey Angelson <jeff.a...@gmail.com> wrote:

 

Good morning ☀️

I had a thought about Rumi’s line: “What you seek is seeking you.”

 

For a long time I took that pretty literally — that what I need will come to me at the right time.

 

But this morning it landed differently.

 

It feels like the deepest truth is that there is no separate seeker.

The one who is seeking and what is being sought are not two.

 

Maybe the point isn’t to “get somewhere higher”…

Maybe it’s simply to notice that what we’re looking for is already here, as awareness itself.

 

Reflecting more, maybe the gift here is simple: a small rest from seeking. Not an answer, but a recognition that what we’re looking for may already be here.

 

Has anyone else experienced that kind of quiet shift?



Jeff Angelson
 
--
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/CAAUbiCS8yFb09_2gBBsaA6kXfD51kVyy6fmiuJwNuT5Mojsizw%40mail.gmail.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/B8317856-76F0-4984-A5F8-C07DBE8C90C1%40gmail.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/CAGdKTP41ajgE6Ox3%3DL5ye4AK_rmb-sqdH9CrDJ-iKs_RO1q0DA%40mail.gmail.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/CAAUbiCTG3PwBr4KQSqz5iqVx4ZA%3D9aBBOkkVQ00YbAE7EyVn6Q%40mail.gmail.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/CAGgGDoA8EtBKsSh4MwY2toAhytAdfB9ZROqtz6TjOHLSxky0sQ%40mail.gmail.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/E898B453-6E89-4F87-BE52-21AC42F88978%40paulrezendes.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/CAGgGDoCp_Ov33pf0rnoLeoSUAh72DmkjjEaeNCO%2BvtKOc%3DauWA%40mail.gmail.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/CAGdKTP4DQbM%3D9DfRc_2bzPM93LCf7ZAx_%3DsSdxcKiQMeRqAATw%40mail.gmail.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/EF52F0AA-54AF-4484-BA96-FBBA5464861D%40paulrezendes.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/CAGgGDoCWxQq2%3DF0L0ns6kOcnyXFLvjgR5beT0wL10EUS05r0UA%40mail.gmail.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/2087151250.1025002.1769966379560%40connect.xfinity.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/BD3A28DF-5D07-4263-8F00-254C69FBB6B4%40paulrezendes.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.

--
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/CAAUbiCT%3DhPtz0gGjTdH7Cpife8%2BTnmLmUSQtGFis19-S2tQKqg%40mail.gmail.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/CAGdKTP68n%2BY2gw4nHf2a2um0Hgvu7VjW%3D_8A%2Boe0D0%2BFNfNhsQ%40mail.gmail.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/06CD24B4-51CE-4D2B-B889-A44492DF7380%40paulrezendes.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/CAGdKTP4vuwrjXJVdwf-5u%3DS_9OiJPWc0O7s0mOT4BPGtKVqVQg%40mail.gmail.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/CAC473FD-7CC3-4C39-BB39-BEFE88241362%40paulrezendes.com.

Dan Kilpatrick

unread,
Feb 1, 2026, 5:36:11 PMFeb 1
to diehar...@googlegroups.com
Sunhee, All,

Thanks for this, I thought you had some really interesting things to say. The part about referencing our experiencing, for example, as well as the part about the waves and ocean. This resonated with me.

Having said this, I used to surf many eons ago (and still bodysurf). When I'm waiting for a wave to ride, I'm watching them all forming and rolling in. I really don't focus on the ocean beyond. And when I catch a wave, it is its momentum and flux etc that I'm experiencing. And I'll often comment on the beauty of the waves on a glassy day, especially when winds are offshore and the waves seem to have lion's manes. It's all about the waves. So I easily overlook the ocean that is the waves. although somehow the waves are implicitly the ocean......  

But this is quite natural, isn't it? It is part of being a seemingly localized human being (form, if you like), one that experiences itself as local and separate from the waves and ocean, as an approximation. But I am really riding the ocean as it approaches the shore. So waves are just a shortcut way to refer to the ocean as it comes ashore. And there is no way that I can take in the totality of the ocean as I look out upon it, like you said.

So we can't deny our experiencing as being localized and at times seemingly separate. And the question might be, is this experiencing localized itself? Or is this experience of being localized happening within experiencing itself (our consciousness) which has no bounds.....  Where do we draw the lines between your and my experiencing, and everything else that is here and we are experiencing right now. And what is it without defining it?  -Dan

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/21AA8DBD-67A2-41A2-A962-F0F70832903B%40gmail.com.

Janet Asiain

unread,
Feb 1, 2026, 6:30:08 PMFeb 1
to diehar...@googlegroups.com
Well I definitely understood that, Dan. You expressed in your own way what I was groping toward after reading Sunhee’s message. Something about how we as impermanent manifestations of ground can interact only with other manifestations, such as waves, but can’t experience in this form the totality of, for example, the ocean. Isn’t there a great beauty in that. Fully experiencing (being present with) what is available for us to experience is all we need to “be one with” everything, as far as I can tell. 

Janet A

Dan Kilpatrick

unread,
Feb 1, 2026, 6:34:02 PMFeb 1
to Diehards google
Right on, Janet. There is no part separate from the whole, nor a whole separate from the part. This is what comes up for me. No good word that is neither and both at the same time....
-Dan

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diehard-group/CAGdKTP5PpxAs8N5UrNT%2Bg4dxiK4TQ%2BedNJa1v8DRomz%3Dj2F%3D1g%40mail.gmail.com.

Jason Klav

unread,
Feb 13, 2026, 11:21:07 AM (7 days ago) Feb 13
to diehar...@googlegroups.com
Sunhee! 
First I got to say it’s awesome you are using a ChatGPT type of thing to help you with your writing! I found it incredibly easy to understand you! That is awesome! I sometimes use it depending on who I’m talking to in my life, to soften what I want to say to them if I anticipate they will get offended by what I want to say. Haha. It’s such a great tool!! 

Ok on to your email…

Is there anyone who can describe what the Whole looks like?


Yep, it looks like THIS. This present moment in its totality including everything seen, heard, tasted, felt, sensed, imagined, unimagined, every molecule in existence, along with all the space in between and then all the opposites of all of those. This one giant blob of everything and nothing that we call life in the now. That is what the whole looks like. Also include your awareness and the awareness of the awareness of it all and that whole infinite loop.  Can’t forget about that too. 😜

Is the Whole made up of billions of parts/separated entities?

Yes and no at the same time. It’s a paradox that can never be solved by the mind, only pointed towards. Similar to the Koan “what’s the sound of one hand clapping?”. 


But does depth or waves matter to the ocean itself?


Love this question!! Again I would answer yes and no. 

Side tracking from your question in something it brought up for me…

Although no one brought this up here, I’ve always found it interesting when people say that after what I would call the “final realization”, the ocean somehow keeps getting deeper for them. While I agree the mind’s understanding and the alignment of the form with that realization can continue to unfold and seemingly deepen, I haven’t experienced any change in the depth of the fundamental realization of no self and no separation that happened in 2011. It has remained exactly the same. Unchanging and not moving.

The pretend form of Jason (the wave), has changed endlessly and gone through all kinds of deepenings in experience. But the realized totality (the ocean), has stayed exactly as it is. I don’t really see how it could be otherwise?!?!?🤣🤣

Anyways, just a side tracking of this mind. Great post Sunhee!! 

Enjoy the now! 
-Jason
Cheers!

On Feb 1, 2026, at 2:47 PM, Sunhee Kim <inca...@gmail.com> wrote:




Whoever likes to read mumble jumble :) 


When one seeks truth or realization, any kind of method—meditation, discussion, Zoom meetings, retreats—can be helpful. A certain level of intellectual understanding may also be useful.


Communication through concepts and ideas does not necessarily need to stop.

However, a possible hindrance is that when one encounters concepts or ideas about Truth, especially from a realized person, the mind tends to grasp them. It tries to understand the pointer, to make sense of it according to one’s own perception. Along the way, there may be insights here and there, but the more the mind tries to understand deeply, the more it seems to replace one idea with another—idea A with idea B.


Instead of dropping all ideas and concepts, or simply seeing them arise and pass away, one may remain caught in the attempt to understand. Seeing ideas exactly as they are can be challenging when there is still a “me” trying to do something with them.


Understanding intellectually that a thought arises from What Is does not mean one clearly knows What Is.

Nor is a part the same as the whole.


Is there anyone who can describe what the Whole looks like? Is the Whole made up of billions of parts/separated entities?


I have heard the analogy of the ocean and the waves. Although I understand it is a metaphor, yet when I look at the ocean, there is only the ocean and its movement. I do not see a separation between the ocean and its movement. Just the way the ocean is..

Appears still or moving…


Still, we label that movement as “waves,” as if waves were separate entities, when they are not. There is just the ocean—nothing else. Yet we objectify it: “that wave is big,” “that one is small,” “this part of the ocean is deeper than another,” and so on.


But does depth or waves matter to the ocean itself?



Thank you 🙏 

Sunhee

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.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages