u/pl8doh

That includes you.

There is no water without waving.

The wake entails the boat. The reflection entails the mirror. The trail entails the solid ember. The referencing entails the referent.

The past entails the present. This present appearing continuously pulls a past into existence and then claims it is the source.

The dream entails the dreamer. All there is, is dreaming.

In this appearing now is the idea of this appearing previously. Simply realize that 'prior to this' appearing prior to this is clearly absurd. Prior to this can only appear now. There is nothing actually prior.

It's not the dog chasing the tail, it's the tail chasing the tail. The moment that the durability, history, perspective of the tail is made real, the chase is on.

Before the rabbit could be pulled out of the hat, the magician had to be pulled out. Who pulled the magician out. Sleight of hand. The belief in prior.

In this, appearing now, is the idea of this, appearing previously. Simply realize that 'prior to this' appearing prior to this, is clearly absurd. Prior to this can only appear now. There is nothing actually prior.

It's not the dog chasing the tail, it's the tail chasing the tail. The moment that the durability, history, perspective of the tail is made real, the chase is on.

Before the rabbit could be pulled out of the hat, the magician had to be pulled out. Who pulled the magician out. Sleight of hand. The belief in prior.

Thoughts are the waves. The counting itself is just another wave. The counting doesn't count. If it did, the counting would be endless. Every counted thought becomes another thought to be counted. Every attempt to finish the counting generates more counting. It would be an infinite regress. There is no need to know that there is no counter or anything to be counted. The counting simply does not count. The mythical foundation of counting is equality. In order for there to be an equality, there must be a duality, at least two distinct things.

Thought lacked the definition of both referent and reference, until now. This is most clearly expressed by the phrase, 'thoughts on thoughts'.

It's not the dog catching the tail, but the dog realizing that the entire dog, the chasing, chaser and tail, is nothing but trail. The trail of a fast moving red-hot ember in the night sky. Realization is not the end of trailing, it is the end of seeker, seeking and sought.

Implicit to nonduality is no teacher, no student, no teaching. Any perceived authority is unaffected by the life or death of its perceived origin. The demand for a more subtle understanding or teaching is the clearest evidence that knowledge itself is futile.

There is no solid self, only the mind’s constant rereferencing. Each appearance is instantly linked to past appearances and to the idea of ‘me.’ That chain of rereferencing creates the trail we call ‘my life’ and ‘myself', like the trail of a fast moving ember in the night sky. When rereferencing is dereferenced, the links dissolve, the trail is seen to be a composite formation.

Like the waking state, the dream is made familiar by rereferencing. Clearly no material world is required. Nothing actually familiar.

A description of what is seen is not separate from what is seen. It is a reference to what is seen whether actual or imagined. The “I” is the referent that has no independent existence, like an imagined apple or tomato.

Language is both reference and referent. It is the sound “apple” and the imagined or perceived apple appearing together. The word “red” turns red when seen. The word “red” in a foreign language you don’t understand has no referent other than the sound itself. When one becomes fluent in another language, the words reference the referent directly not it's local languages counterpart. Referencing is the connection per se.

There is no territory without the map. Form is referencing, referencing is form. The scene and the seeing define being by being. “I” is simply an imagined reference of the referencing.

This plus this equals this. Unquantifiable, nonnumeric, neither one nor many. Counting is an appearance in, not an attribute of. Neither divided, nor united.

It can be imagined but never heard.

It can be imagined but never heard.

The apparent “I” is not a thing that references, it is the referencing itself. The very movement that creates the illusion of a separate referent. “I am” is the reference that points to itself as the thing being referenced.

The “I” that says “I am” is the referencing. The “am” that it points to is also the referencing. There is no independent “I” behind it. There is no stable “being” or referent.

“I am” is pure self-referential activity. The light appearing as the sense of a separate self that is constantly confirming its own existence through referencing. When realized, the drama of “Who am I?” dissolves, as the “I” was never anything other than the referencing referencing itself. In other words, there is no referent other than the referencing.

A sufficient duration or referencing compression must occur for the self-referencing to appear. At its core is distinction which cannot be made distinct. The referencing of distinctions, which are references, is remembering.

In short, the container is a reference to the content or 'In here' represents 'out there'.

Realization is dereferencing.

The apparent “I” is not a thing that references, it is the referencing itself. The very movement that creates the illusion of a separate referent. “I am” is the reference that points to itself as the thing being referenced.

The “I” that says “I am” is the referencing. The “am” that it points to is also the referencing. There is no independent “I” behind it. There is no stable “being” or referent.

“I am” is pure self-referential activity. The light appearing as the sense of a separate self that is constantly confirming its own existence through referencing. When realized, the drama of “Who am I?” dissolves, as the “I” was never anything other than the referencing referencing itself. In other words, there is no referent other than the referencing.

A sufficient duration or referencing compression must occur for the self-referencing to appear. At its core is distinction which cannot be made distinct. The referencing of distinctions, which are references, is remembering.

In short, the container is a reference to the content or 'In here' represents 'out there'.

Realization is dereferencing.

No distinction can be made between this and knowing. That would just be more knowing. The knowing cannot be objectified, cannot be known. That's all that can be said regarding this.

Science believes there is an observer. That observer cannot be observed. Any observation of that observer would not be that observer.

Memory is the only anchor. Like a rear-view mirror, the past is projected. You are not seeing the way things are, you are seeing the way things were. The sense of being behind these eyes is that rear view. The present is a past construct. The glowing trail of a fast-moving red-hot ember in the night sky is evidence of that past appearance. Now is clearly constructed of the past. The past literally constructs the present.

What is actually appearing when even the sense of “seeing this” is recognized as part of the trailing afterglow? If I woke up in the morning with your thoughts and memories, there would be no way to tell the difference.

Memory is the only anchor. Like a rear-view mirror, the past is projected. You are not seeing the way things are, you are seeing the way things were. The sense of being behind these eyes is that rear view. The present is a past construct. The glowing trail of a fast-moving red-hot ember in the night sky is evidence of that past appearance. Now is clearly constructed of the past. The past literally constructs the present.

What is actually appearing when even the sense of “seeing this” is recognized as part of the trailing afterglow? If I woke up in the morning with your thoughts and memories, there would be no way to tell the difference.

There is no 'you' independent of the afterglow.

Knowing of object and knowing of knower. Knowing is distinction. Nothing is seen independent of the distinction. The distinction is inexplicable. Any attempt to explain distinction is simply perpetuation of distinction.

Any determination of what this is, appears in this. Appearing, without appearing to, or appearing from. Neither content nor container.