Freedom from Self-Negating Nonduality Pt2 : Jessica Eve and Tim Freke

[@marianrose1259]

Really enjoyed this second part of your beautifully sane conversation, thanks. With regard to the ‘everything’s within consciousness’ perspective, when I tried to inhabit that, I felt horribly claustrophobic and trapped. Whereas, when I inhabit my natural-to-me perspective of ‘I’m here in this body on the Earth in a universe’ everything is vast, spacious and free-ing. Can’t wait for the pod book!😻🌹🕯️

[@TimFreke1]

Love reading your comment

[@Clive-oo]

I could never resonate with this "everything within consciousness". I just assumed that meditation wasn't for me. I just couldn't let myself go there. Now meditation seems easier, when I know I'm just focusing on a different aspect of myself.

[@josephgagliano6145]

This is brilliant. No absolute truth necessary here.

[@jgarciajr82]

I'm not sure about the ultimate truth either, but I do find beauty, truth and the good in this conversation and the elephant in the room between the two of you would be God. I can almost hear God speak through you guys.

[@Wonderlust57]

Hi Tim, would you be willing to explicitly, clearly, and simply state your ontology?

[@TimFreke1]

Yes for sure. I have a series of videos coming out in 2025 that start with a clear ontology and then expand into much more detail. Coming soon. You are also welcome to join my online community as a guest and I can explore with you directly.

[@Dodgerzden]

The reaction I have when someone says this 3D world experience and the ego is just an illusion is, "So what?" When someone is experiencing hallucinations because of a mental disorder, drug use or whatever, those are real perceptions to the one having them. Just because others can not perceive it, does not make it not real. And calling personal experiences an illusion is not helpful in any way. It's not going to make you snap out of it and finally see the light. And hopefully no one will test the claim by cutting off their arm because it's not real anyhow. I suspect no one really means this ego reality is an illusion literally, but that it's impossible to convey the message with words because language has a limited use.

[@TimFreke1]

I resonate with a lot of what you say, but I suggest we need to avoid the 'its just beyond words' cop out. Explaining the taste of chocolate is beyond words if the other person hasn't tasted anything sweet. We need to work out communicating and understanding. That's how we got from stone axes to the internet. The harm that is done by the denial of the individual self (whether it is meant literally or not) is real because we are denying what we are. I am the person writing this comment ... I am not some other 'true self' or 'pure consciousness' as I used to believe when i was younger. When we believe false things ... it is then we are caught in illusion or misunderstanding. Does that make sense my friend?

[@shaunbanana911]

@@TimFreke1 I find you very contradictory Tim - You refer to Jung as I did and I referred to the true self as the self that individuates by recognising the ego, persona and shadow. The ego develops in early childhood - These are quotes from Jungian teachings and yet you question my interpretation of self. I think you are thinking of a different true self. With regards to oneness being ineffable I think that makes perfect sense as we have not comprehended the depths of nature in ways we can express or ideate clearly even science agrees with that. Sensory experience comes first before thoughts and as such ideation fails to completely grasp what we experience. We may KNOW what we experience but we fail with ideas and words to explain it - ineffable. I could say that my experience of oneness is like flowing outwards into an infinite flowing stream of oneness but what can you ideate or relate to that is similar to that - something that at best that is an experience of flowing - maybe swimming or going down a water slide but you have no similar experiences of oneness unless you have experienced oneness. You perhaps should read W.T Stace and his works on mysticism as he and William James say that people who experience oneness often colour their description of it with what experiences and ideas they have acquired through life be that with religious ideas or otherwise when in truth it is ineffable beyond all normal experiences and ideas that we experience in everyday life - anything else would be absurd I think you can describe/ideate an orgasm but it would be negation in comparison to the real thing. The same with love. There are experiences we have that are ineffable in comparison to what we can ideate. Saying its ineffable is not a 'cop out' its the truth and anything else is just a feeble grasp of the ungraspable. If I could express my love for my son in words and ideas I think that would be seriously lacking and negate the KNOWING I have that my love for him reaches unfathomable depths. Nature as many depths we are yet to understand including why twomen want to have children at all - Logically it would scare the hell out of you if you thought/ideated that process. "Jung believed that a healthy ego should be formed in the first half of life, and that in the second half of life, a person should connect with the Self. The Self is the center of the total personality, which includes the ego, the unconscious, and consciousness. Jung believed that connecting with the Self leads to a deeper understanding of who a person is, and a greater capacity to feel connected to others and the world" "Jung considered that from birth every individual has an original sense of wholeness-of the Self-but that with development a separate ego-consciousness crystallizes out of the original feeling of unity. This process of ego-differentiation provides the task of the first half of one's life-course, though Jungians also saw psychic health as depending on a periodic return to the sense of Self, something facilitated by the use of myths, initiation ceremonies, and rites of passage." - True self

[@Dodgerzden]

@@TimFreke1 Of course you are correct about using language being a barrier to understanding as an excuse to not try to understand. It's all we have now until all of us become proficient at telepathy while in our physical bodies, which seems to be more efficient. Words can at least point someone in the right direction.

[@shaunbanana911]

We can attempt to describe the ineffable with words and ideas that are derived from categorisation and experience but they fail to fully describe it. I have experienced oneness and the experience reaches far beyond description and others who have experienced the same thing feel the same way. Words that relate to meaning are heavily reliant on experiences and we can't ideate many of our experiences adequately. There is a knowing that reaches far beyond words and ideas, anything else is like trying to grasp mist with your hand - you might end up with a little but not the whole thing

[@Prof.PProudlove]

It’s not easy to describe but it’s not complex. You can always tell when people are talking about something else because they’ll make it all flowery and dramatic. That’s all just in their heads. Tim’s written 38 books about it mind you.

[@shaunbanana911]

@@Prof.PProudlove How would you describe it? if you don't mind me asking

[@Prof.PProudlove]

@@shaunbanana911 Hahaha. Badly. The fact that it's difficult to describe is because it's so simple though. It's as simple as me sitting there and there being a thought, or some internal movement - and then that flowing out of me. Then there is no thought, no movement and no person. Nothing at all that is felt except for the fact of being aware of it all. That's 'experiencing' it. Carrying that fully back into daily life, permanently, is what I'd term enlightenment.

[@shaunbanana911]

@@Prof.PProudlove I experienced oneness sat on Brighton beach one evening when I was pondering the night sky when suddenly things changed and there was an outflowing from within which flowed outwards until I was one with it all. Thats about as far as I get with a description of it. The intuitive knowing of the experience is extraordinarily deep and beyond doubt but I can only relate to the descriptive idea that it unites opposites and it flows. Obviously it happens to people in different ways and to some people who have very little spiritual experience, I think we enter states of being that are conducive to us having these experiences sometimes by spiritual pursuit and sometimes we are just in tune, but its difficult to put your finger on what that state is exactly. We try to use words and categories to describe things but oneness is beyond that. Sure you can point to it and skirt around it with descriptive ideas but you can never grasp it all. Words are a funny thing. I used to follow words through the dictionary to see where their definition ended. I would look up a descriptive word and then look at the key words that defined it and then look up there definition and see what key words defined them and kept going until I realised that words are just indicators to a very deep intuitive understanding that we acquire with experience and meaning is a very deep affair.

[@Prof.PProudlove]

@@shaunbanana911 'I flowed outwards until I was one with it all'. That's a great way to describe it! When it happens spontaneously for me it's almost always in nature. That's the awakening, that's it, and that's all we can really know. Anything added on top of that is due to thinking.

[@Clive-oo]

But this new way of looking at it you consider better right🤔. Or have I got you wrong? Or are you saying that any way of looking at it is fine as long as it resonates with the individual? I'm sure the podbook will clarify this for me anyway. Cheers Tim.

[@TimFreke1]

I am definitely saying the new worldview I am exploring is better, (much better Clive!), but it includes a real respect for our individual differences in how we choose to evolve. (Podbook being recorded right now - so I hope coming soon)

[@Clive-oo]

@TimFreke1 ah gotcha, thanks for clarifying. Podbook coming soon🤗

[@thegloriousbothand]

for me, I'd say "better" based on what I've come to value and *better able* to lead in the direction I'd love to see humanity go in. Yes, from my personal perspective!

[@Clive-oo]

@@thegloriousbothand yes I understand that. That it is better for some individuals. It's better for me too. I was just wondering if Tim was suggesting if the other, older view may suit other individuals better and therefore it all depends on what the individual gets out of it. But he wasn't. When referring to the individuals in the conversation he was saying that with this new perspective each individual is extremely important as we are each flourishing into something greater. Rather than we're just a smaller, less significant part of the One. That's where I misunderstood the conversation. Hope this makes sense, helps me to put my thoughts down on paper (screen😊)...

[@Clive-oo]

@@thegloriousbothand yes better as it resonates with you. But also objectively better as it exalts all individuals.

[@shaunbanana911]

The self truly is at the centre of all we are and Jung was right. We have to undo all the knots before we are in a state to experience oneness. We have to be at one with ourselves before we can be at one with everything - common sense I think. The ego, persona and shadow all have to be addressed and only the true self can do that - all that social conditioning has tied many knots. If you can face yourself you can experience the oneness which that insight takes you too

[@TimFreke1]

@@shaunbanana911 true self?

[@shaunbanana911]

@@TimFreke1 Yes the self that can see the ego, persona and shadow and not the ego or persona that people choose to inhabit or find themselves inhabiting

[@shaunbanana911]

@@TimFreke1 I find it strange that people talk about the ego and persona and don't realise that it is the true self that is doing that observation

[@TimFreke1]

@ what true self?

[@shaunbanana911]

@@TimFreke1 "The self Jung believed that the self is the center of the personality, including the ego, consciousness, and the unconscious. The self is primary and present before the ego, which develops from it. Jung described the self as the totality of the body and mind, the God image, and a dynamic force that guides a person through life"

[@shaunbanana911]

The ultimate truth is that which unites all opposites and once you get that you understand the true nature of the one as the one has no opposites. It is though a truth that is ineffable. Thats the only ultimate truth.

[@thegloriousbothand]

"​"Either/or thinking has difficulty with a dialectical synthesis that unites polarities because it assumes that one viewpoint must be more real and primary than the other: Seeming opposites are either “this or that,” but not “both and.” Either/or thinking cannot conceptualize two seeming opposites being equally real and fundamentally embedded in each other. " thoughts?

[@shaunbanana911]

@@thegloriousbothand The one in itself has no opposites hence it being the one. That must logically be true and yet its differentiated into many apparent opposites or at least what we have deemed as opposites yet science has strong evidence that everything is made of the same stuff be that particles and/or energy. They have united the weak force with the electromagnetic force and strongly believe that all the remaining forces can be united into one. I, like so many others, have experienced oneness and it is truly ineffable but you can describe the path too it but not what it is. I think people want to grasp it and own it and share it but they colour it in with descriptions that are not accurate. I think you can give indicators to it and like you say in the video some authors can point to it but to say what it is is only to say what its not (Going all Daoist here lol) Its not a cop out to say that its ineffable its the truth and anything else is a feeble grasp at the ungraspable. I think it should be discussed to help people know what they are looking for but pointers is the best you will get and to try experiences like Tim offers and other methods. The fact of the matter is, is that we all communicate with such a vast deep intuitive understanding, which we take for granted, that is beyond words itself and words themselves act only as pointers when it comes to describing things. The one in my experience resides in this intuitive world we all inhabit which we know is difficult to express yet has the deepest sense off experience & knowing. You are right about "both and" and that takes deep intuitive knowing to come to know that. General logic which we use to assess most things deals with either/or with the excluded middle in logic being where the "both and" reside - that which is neither one or the other.

[@shaunbanana911]

@@thegloriousbothand W.T Stace's "The teaching of the mystics" and his follow up book are both a great read on the mystical experience of oneness. He's not the greatest philosopher but he is the first to break the experience down into common denominators that are experienced by most people who have experienced oneness. I had my experience and several others kinds of experience when I was in my twenties and years later decided to research what they were and these books best described what I experienced to some degree ,even though it remains ineffable, from a methodical point of view. I have collected related books since and its true that people who have this experience colour it in with experiences and knowledge they have acquired in their life which do go some way to describing it but ultimately they fall way short because it is ineffable.

[@jgarciajr82]

Are you sure it wouldn't look supernatural ? If you compare our ancestors or great ancestors to modernity, we would look pretty supernatural I would argue. We're also kind of cyborgs because our phone is so attached to us. Let alone meta on its way. 🙏♥️🔥🙌🤯👍💓

[@Clive-oo]

I'd say things can "look" supernatural when looked at from outside of them. Or from another perspective. But it's not universally true that they are supernatural.

[@TimFreke1]

supernatural generally refers to things outside the natural order. I am suggesting spiritual experiences are of a level of reality that is within the natural evolution of the universe. So in that sense there is no supernatural.