A comment about Truth and Enlightenment

Can we look together into what “I don’t know what anything means” and
I don’t know what anything is for” may mean?

This entails the most difficult trial, namely, to let go of any inner attachment to our
ideas, having the courage of dropping any thought sense of security.

WHATEVER TACIT RELATION WE “NORMALLY” HOLD TO THINGS IS BUT A LIE!

To interrupt any urge for name-giving, knowing that whatever definition keeps us
trapped into a false relation to Life, requires great courage.

IDENTITY IS ATTACHMENT. IDENTITY IS FEAR.

Any thought or idea we have about anything is basically attachment too.
It is about eventually having the courage to “interrupt” everything, that is, to let go of whatever expectation as to what we call “suchness” – or normality -, and perceive everything in a state of total mystery.

No matter how subtle, the Mind is unable to conceive any true picture of what
Illumination entails. In fact, enlightenment is the mind´s ultimate defeat,
the death of projection.

That is why It is neither Jesus or Buddha, nor fullness or emptiness, not this nor that.

Truth is not any “ideal”. Searching must stop for Truth to appear. As long as we continue with the quest for Self or Truth we only delude ourselves – “Are we there yet…?” that´s the voice of your deception.

You say:
“But there is something in me that doesn’t trust that message, a sneaking suspicion that I have to keep moving, keep looking, thinking maybe I will find it in the next book, or in the near future.”

Who is speaking here other than your cunning and deceiving Ego who by no means
wants to “lose” the fight and postpone everything into “the near future”.

All books, all quotes are mere approximations – they cannot describe a reality which transcends any human concept…Otherwise the great Zen masters would have probably
been University professors…:)

Joakim´s commenting whether Change is possible

Deliberate change is not possible.

Where there is a wish, it will not be fulfilled.

You have to actually be the change itself.
Being the change means not being you.

But the change will not have a direction if you don’t direct it. So the change will actually not be a change, but just a happening, an expression of the actual state of the existing (what is).

So you can be that change by seeing what is, but you can never actually become
“what is” by choice, though it may appear like that to you or to others.
The action or happening comes before the thought, but the mind always claims credit for every thought or action with some potential value.
By this I mean that if you think you can change things the way you want them to, this change has probably already started to take place.

So, in this way… the law of attraction works, but not as an effect of any action or thought deliberately made by any self.
There are no deliberate thoughts actually. I think we pay too much attention to our attention, our being “aware” is never equal to “what is”, but merely “one illusion at a time”…

The trap of experience

Experiences are inevitable, perhaps necessary; life is a series of experiences, but the mind need not be burdened with its own accumulative demands. It can wipe off each experience and keep itself innocent, unburdened. This is important, otherwise the mind can never be fresh, alert and pliable. The ‘how’ to keep the mind pliable is not the problem; the ‘how’ is the search for a method, and method can never make the mind innocent; it can make it methodical, but never innocent, creative.

J. Krishnamurti