Thread: Am I a psychic or a bullshitter?

Yes, but I also think that while the reason why we get distracted is because of the ego, it is also true that the reason why we get distracted is because of the id. And who is not to say that distraction is not actually better for us ultimately than that from which we were distracted, and if that is the case the superego might make sure we are distracted as well.

Oh well I wasn't meaning Ego as in Freudian terms, but the original meaning of the word. I don't know much about Freudian psychology. I have no idea what id and superego are. To me these are just concepts. By 'ego' I mean: sense of individuality, self, being a person. This is something concrete that I can see in my direct experience. I can summon the ego when I need it.

I started a new thread on the ego subject if anyone is interested.

Dannon, you almost seem to be stubbornly insinuating that my ego is the driving force behind my vigilance. Vigilance simply means when I catch myself not being mindful, I become mindful instead. It's absolutely true that ego is what causes me to lose mindfulness from time to time, and I never pretended to be completely free from it. But I'm still in disagreement with what you believe vigilance means. It is not an act of ego to realize you're not being mindful. It is an act of attention. Redirecting my attention to reflect back on itself is not driven by ego, either.

I hear you. I am saying that even the act of vigilance is "you" catching yourself. It is the part of the ego which claims consciousness. I don't mean in the Freudian sense. So it isn't an insult, not like how people use it as in "You are so full of yourself!" I don't mean that. I mean it as "sense of self". This is the ego as I mean it. It is a dream character.
And it is a good practice. At some point the ego will identify with mindfulness. And mindfulness is good! Just be aware that mindfulness is always the case. There is never a moment when there is no mindfulness, it is only the ego which directs its attention at different things. But without this ego there is nothing to be distracted. That is what I am pointing to. So let me say instead: "Without this sense of self, there is nothing to be distracted." The presence that is mindfulness has always been here, dreaming this world, and now it is reading this sentence. It is never not here. It is what is aware, not this "you" that directs attention and tries to be mindful. Mindfulness is not confined to your head, or your body. This mindfulness is what dreams the dream, the ego is a dream character. This whole experience is confined to the mindful presence.

Do you see that I mean nothing personal here about you or me or anybody? There is only one mindful presence. And it is all happening and has always been happening to this one mindful presence, but it isn't lucid so it is dreaming that it is a person trying to be mindful and remember! But this trying to be mindful and remember is a dream character trying to remember something that is always already the case. Do you see how in this dream you and me are communicating but really you are just communicating with yourself? Think of me as a reality check and this is a dream. Because that is exactly what is going on.

But this is how the dream character becomes lucid, it directs its attention at itself and tries to remember. If it tries real hard, eventually it will tire out and unwind and see the aware presence that was always here will become lucid. Then the whole illusion busts open.

But the action to become mindful cannot be driven by the ego, or it doesn't work, even if it is the ego which realizes it's not being mindful.

When the mindful presence becomes lucid you will see that you and me are just one mindful awareness talking to itself. It really is quite amazing! Miraculous even!

What makes you think it's not lucid?

It is always lucid. It is the Buddha Samantabhadra which has been lucid since the beginning of time, never being not lucid.

But it is a paradox, because there are obscurations to the knowledge of that fact. This is evident by the fact that you think you exist and there is something you can do, like being mindful, being vigilante, directing attention, wondering if you are psychic (We are all one intelligent that dreams up the universe, of course we are psychic, but not the ego...) You are more powerful than you can even imagine!
These obscurations are illusory. But we don't know that when we believe in them.

It isn't that there is some nucleus of Buddha-nature that lays buried by obscurations deep within our inner mind. No...The sum total of our existence is just a bunch of obscurations floating like clouds in the infinite sky of our Buddha nature. Just imagine that you do not exist at all and keep your eyes slightly unfocused. Get that 'a-perception' thing going on.

When we fall asleep the clouds cover up the sky and it appears we are not aware or that we lose consciousness. This is why we die in unconsciousness. But what we really are, the space-like buddha Samantabhadra, is never distracted or not lucid. When our obscurations diminish we will see that we were pretending the whole thing. We pretended we were obscured. We pretended we didn't know. But to us it seems like we have to try hard to be vigilante! In fact it is the other way around. It takes a lot of effort to maintain this illusion. That is why we are tired and we age and die and feel stress. That is why we suffer. It takes SOOO much energy. That is all the ego knows is effort. That is why we need to get the ego to relax, by flattering it, making it proud. Having good self-esteem. Loving one's self/ego.

But awareness takes nooo effort. It just is like the sky. It takes no effort because it is empty, the sky doesn't have to hold itself up or try to stay there or have to be vigilante. The sky cannot die, it cannot be hurt or changed in any way!

I don't try hard to be vigilant. Vigilance is just my word to mean that I pay close attention to my thoughts. Perhaps my awareness is not obscured from the greater self and from that perception I watch my ego self as it continues to defend itself against your assumptions about it.

Originally Posted by Original Poster

But the action to become mindful cannot be driven by the ego, or it doesn't work, even if it is the ego which realizes it's not being mindful.

Very good point.

There is no action to become mindful. It appears there is, that is the ego claiming it. That is why I say that trying to be vigilante is part of the problem.
There is no action to become mindful. Trying to be vigilante only perpetuates the illusion of someone in control of this.
It isn't that there is 'you' who is being mindful. It is rather, that mindful presence is having an experience of you trying to be vigilante. The ego allows this, because then it can claim it. It likes to allow just enough mindfulness to glorify itself. hehe. It says "Look how vigilante I am!"

Again though, you continue insinuating that I am "trying" to be vigilant. You continue to use that word to mean something different than how I am using it. I am not "trying" to be vigilant. My ego is conditioned to recognize patterns which impede it and to then surrender. You're probably going to say that surrender is an action, now, as well .

Originally Posted by Original Poster

I don't try hard to be vigilant. Vigilance is just my word to mean that I pay close attention to my thoughts. Perhaps my awareness is not obscured from the greater self and from that perception I watch my ego self as it continues to defend itself against your assumptions about it.

|

This is how all egos are. It is nothing personal. I know your ego thinks it is different. hehe. There is no greater self. There is no self! Greater or lesser! If there was no obscurations you would say "I know exactly what you are talking about!" But you do seem very non-reactive. So I know that you do have some insight. Most people would say "Fuck you! You are crazy or deluded or a fraud or whatever!" and then they would feel better. So you have cultivated some worthy mindfulness.

I know that vigilance is your word for paying close attention to your thoughts. It doesn't matter if you are trying a little or trying hard. In fact, it is like deep sleep. In deep sleep there is no sense of self, no ego, no effort, just utter relaxation. If you are trying at all it is the ego. Deep sleep is covered by obscurations if we are unconscious during it. But really it takes as much effort as sleeping. Or being dead. No effort is required ideally. Right now, maybe you have no choice and need to make some effort. I still make some effort to remain aware during deep sleep, which keeps me awake lol, so I relax then lose consciousness for a split second then wake up again in the clear lucidity beyond form and perception and sensation and awareness. So I still have a sense of self I am trying to see through in deep sleep. It is a great big sense of self, universal. Feeling at one with the universe is hard to give up or see through for the ego. So I am still making a slight effort in deep sleep but the clouds are thinning. I know ultimately the clouds thinning has nothing to do with me. My seeking and effort is just a story reflected to explain why the clouds are thinning in this dream and I am waking up.

You have officially exhausted the entertainment I can get out of this conversation. Why is it I can see through your words but you get stuck on mine? You are not speaking of reality any more accurately. We both know higher self is a symbol for something that is not self, I thought you would be able to look past the symbols.

Originally Posted by Original Poster

Again though, you continue insinuating that I am "trying" to be vigilant. You continue to use that word to mean something different than how I am using it. I am not "trying" to be vigilant. My ego is conditioned to recognize patterns which impede it and to then surrender. You're probably going to say that surrender is an action, now, as well .

We are cross posting and have been!
See my above post about effort.
I know what you mean.
Again, I am not criticizing your practice.

The way you are using the word surrender, yes, it is a dream action.
It is not really surrendering. Sorry. Again, I am not criticizing it.
Keep doing everything just the way you are.
But real surrender is desperate. It is the last option.
It is hopeless. It is when your ego has been totally defeated
by itself. What you are calling surrender is more of a diplomatic deal you have going with your ego.

Sorry. Again, this is what you should be doing. It is the only thing you can do.
This practice will lead beyond itself and I am just telling you what lies up ahead.

I can tell that you are not liking what I am saying. Sorry.

Originally Posted by Original Poster

You have officially exhausted the entertainment I can get out of this conversation. Why is it I can see through your words but you get stuck on mine? You are not speaking of reality any more accurately. We both know higher self is a symbol for something that is not self, I thought you would be able to look past the symbols.

It only appears to you that i am being stuck on your words.
Your last sentence in this post is not true for me.
Higher self is a symbol for something that doesn't exist.
There is no higher anything.
This is it. Right here. This is how reality is presenting itself right now.
There is no other reality than this. This is the dream. There is nothing
outside the dream.

I have no problem with what you're saying. But I could turn this conversation around on you and say that you'll get there, soon enough, as well, if I wanted to. I am not trying to be accurate with my words, merely suitable. They do not describe the actual process nor reality at all. They are simply bridges to connect our minds together. And I'm simply disappointed, I suppose, that you cannot see through them. I could pick apart your words, as well, if I so wanted to. You know you're not speaking truthfully, either, you're utilizing symbols that do not accurately describe what they represent. But fortunately I understand what you mean, because I understand the limitations of words and because I can perceive reality. Unfortunately this appears to be a one-way understanding.

Well. We have both said what we said, and if you understand me that is great.
I know that you that I am assuming things based on your words. Are you saying I am
assuming wrong? Are you saying that you are enlightened? It is not so rare, so I could be assuming.
I know quite a few enlightened people, probably over a hundred. Thanks to the internet we can find each other!
But if you were you wouldn't be saying what you are saying even if you are willfully using inaccurate words as symbols.
I am not picking on the words, but the concepts they are symbolizing to you.
And I am not criticizing you either. Or trying to convert you, or anything.
I am supporting you, saying keep doing what you are doing.
so it isn't that I am not understanding you.
I am on your side with you on this.
You and me are the same.
I know that your true nature that is reading
this sentence is lucid. I know that is where I exist also.
I am not misunderstanding you, I am you.
(That is an example of me using words symbolically,
actually we are one in that we both don't exist).
This awareness that you think is yours that is reading this sentence
right now is the only awareness in existence.
We are the same entity, you and me,
so I understand you like I understand myself.
You are reacting because I am saying you are not enlightened yet
or because I am saying you already are but don't believe it.
I am not criticizing your practice.
But enlightened folks don't have a practice.
I don't really understand what you think I am misunderstanding.
Rather, you are defending your practice, which I am not attacking,
just saying that it will transcend itself and what to look for when it does.

Maybe you are saying that you are not an ego. That what you are doing is taming the ego, conditioning the ego.
That you are in control of the ego. That it is not that hard, you have your ego tamed well to notify you
when it becomes distracted or whatever. I understand that. I am saying to simply recognize, have the insight,
that this 'you' that is in control of the ego is also the ego. Of course the ego doesn't like to hear that.
And feels misunderstood. Maybe I should stop using the word ego because I think everybody thinks of that
in Freudian terms and it seems that is the whole misunderstanding no matter how many times I try to clarify that.
There is no self beyond the ego. Just vast emptiness that is one with everything that arises in it.
I am that guitar leaning against the wall. I am one with it. I can feel what it feels like to be that guitar. I can tell from here whether or not it is in tune. And it is in tune.
I am one with the wall. I know what texture it is, because it is arising within me. I close my eyes and I can still feel it.
The rug, I can tell that it is dirty without looking at it.
Etc. etc. This is always the case since the beginning of time. But because we think that we exist separate from it we cannot usually experience this.

So yes you are psychic, but if you have to ask then you are dreaming you are psychic! But you create this whole world every moment literally! Literally literally! So of course you are psychic. There is nobody else's mind to read that you haven't created! Just like a lucid dream. There are two ways of looking at how to read somebody's mind. One way (the relative symbolic way) is to project your ego into the other person's heart. That is why you are seeing out of your eyes and have access to your memories, because your ego is in this body. But you can project the ego to anywhere, just like a dream. First try projecting it in different parts of your body, then project it a few inches in front of you with your eyes horizontal with your heart. But this is not the correct way to do it because it is an act of will and implies duality and illusion. Because that is an act of will.

The only times I look out somebody else's eyes and have access to their memories is while making love, in surrender, or in dreams. Because it is so intimate to do this with humans, and I am quite shy, I find it easier to do with inanimate objects, like the guitar, the candle, the trees, the sky. Oh to do it with the sky! That is blisssss... To read the sky's mind! Lol

And it isn't words or information, but you ARE it! literally. You know how it feels sometimes when you are making eye contact with someone but you feel you must look away? That is to prevent any ego jumping through. That is why you go through the heart. That is where we all want to be one. The head wants to be separate. lol.

I don't know, it's not rare for an enlightened being to become the town drunk. The thing about me is that I don't keep static beliefs, and I often talk to the mindset I perceive the audience is at.

Honestly my ego is still in tact but I watch its dance impartially and with equanimity. Is that complete enlightenment? No. But it's satori all the same.

So we are all psychic bullshitters! Peace!

Um, it's a bit more complex than that. The question was meant to challenge both believers and ardent disbelievers. It's suppose to trip them both up, essentially.

Originally Posted by Original Poster

Um, it's a bit more complex than that. The question was meant to challenge both believers and ardent disbelievers. It's suppose to trip them both up, essentially.

So in other words it wasn't a real question, it was a fake question posing as a real question, and you wasted the time of anyone who took it at face value.

And when I post real questions about things, you're generally no help because you're busy doing this fake thinking instead of asking the real questions that you'd need to ask in order to understand anything new about my questions.

In other words, you have a little knowledge, and would be able to share it with other people, but mostly you can't because you're too busy pretending to be a wise teacher who can constructively stimulate others by asking insincere questions. Call this what you want, I call it egotism.

Rofl. It's real on whatever layer it's relevant. There's just several more layers beyond that where it stops being real, just like everything else in existence. You're simply confusing faux-partiality with dishonesty.

I mean yes, I am pretending. It's the way I'm designed. Most of the time I pretend to be dumber than I really am, not smarter (I don't really know how to pretend to be smarter since I don't know more than I know, sometimes I'll go aloof to avoid looking as dumb as I am though). But I think you missed the point. I think you think I pretend because it serves my ego. Perhaps it does, in some weird sort of Loki way, but I also find it conducive to approach concepts from new angles. It's far too often people get locked into certain kinds of thinking and we all need a little help now and then to consider ideas in a different way.

I mean you can't really call what I'm doing fake anymore than you can call it fake to speak french to french people if your native tongue is english.

It certainly is egotism, of course. My ego's fucking awesome, too. It loves itself. And I could sit here and argue with you that it's not so simple but I don't really feel like it. I can only speak on my ego's level, my words cannot function for a higher purpose than that, unfortunately. So whatever the truth is, continue to judge me as you like.

Bullllllllshiiiiiit. People who claim to be psychic think they are special....you are a worm on a rock, you know nothing more about anything then any other human being. Pardon my rude behavior but phychics are frauds.

Neil deGrasse Tyson: Are Psychics & the Paranormal Legit? - YouTube

Original Poster:

Don't take what I said as a judgment, its not that for the most part. If pretending is the way you are designed, and you can't turn it off, then that is what it is and I don't blame you for it or think that you can or should do differently. But it still is what it is, and I have something I want to say about it that is relevant at the 'level' that I function at, and which I think should be understandable to you.

If you usually pretend to be dumber than you really are, and this is like "speaking french to french people", what you're essentially saying is that the people who you're addressing are dumber than you. Well I'm not dumber than you. Why do you wish to spend most of your time speaking to people who you regard as dumber than you? Would you care to set aside some of that time to speak to me instead of to a lobotomized caricature of me? Your dumbed down version isn't up to the job of sharing anything very interesting. If you must pretend, then pretend at the highest functioning level that you can communicate at. Otherwise you're wasting our time. Speaking for myself anyway.