The Utter Simplicity of What Is: Mauro Bergonzi

[@markrudis4419]

Brilliantly simple. We cant observe the universe in any scientific method because we are it. Nouns and dissection only serve to ruin the great pleasures that result from mystery. A great talk.

[@Droque_tv]

Mark Rudis I agree with you. Check this out, this goes a bit into what you're talking about. kzbin.info/www/bejne/pGGygpmkqZ2XfNk

[@chaostarr]

"When the sense of being collapses into the utter simplicity of what is nothing else remains but a mysterious aliveness, and that is what you really are"

[@JonasAnandaKristiansson]

[@SidePocket008]

There is no sense of being to collapses. Just like there is no self that can or will fall away. The illusion of separation is "What Is" trying to find "What Is" It's already everything and nothing. And there are no words or thoughts that can describe or know "What Is". Because there is no know-er of "What Is".

[@k.a.ramanardiakam3250]

Beautiful

[@romapelan]

Ciao Mauro, e' bello cio' che trasmetti, I libri che a suo tempo mi avevi consigliato del Dr. KAUSHIK si rivelarono preziosissimi. Da allora sono trascorso 40!!!!!! Quasi mezzo secolo , ti sono sempre molto grata e ne approfitto per dirtelo. Waltraud

[@Jsmithyy]

Once a fish met a turtle What is the ocean i can not see. If you focus on one thing you can not know. We can never perceive the ocean in one perception These maps are so simple. We are the brine and the brine is us! A tree is rooted yet it came from a tiny seed flowing on the wind. That is enough for knowing . The price we pay for not seeing the microbes that fed the seedling! We must be aware the maps are a simplification of what is. Reality is presented in unison in now as if we were one to understand the present moment of unity.

[@ales1us1]

And yet, there is still another step to go, even beyond the mysterious aliveness - there will always be another step to go. For what you really are is this walking along the ever thinner line of self-reflection, there is nothing beyond - this is all there is. And yet, there is still another step to go...

[@Timetampering]

Aleš Us There is No thing is a more accurate statement. There is something but not an object. Language cannot accurately describe the absolute. You are it. There are no steps to go. You are already there. It is not distant from you. Your mind will not get you there, your thoughts will not get you there, these are transient. The only constant in your life is the I that has been the witnessing presence in all of your life. Focus on the one who does the reflecting not the reflections. What you really are shines through all experiences. Namaste

[@ales1us1]

@@Timetampering It is a reflected reflection (self-reflection) which see itself as a self - I. It can know (reflect) only itself - its prior reflections (knowledge). There is no end for self-reflection, for it has never began. It was always here - for itsef. Is there anything outside the reflection? Might be, yet not for me - for the I . That, being unreflected (unknown), is as well as non existent. It is not even a no-thing.

[@nzmpa1]

Its a shame we have to turn off the I with the AM , If we just remain the I then we are always on. The I AM is duality needed but we must always come back to the all seeing I. On/off on/off on/off ON.

[@Antediluvian137]

>Its a shame we have to turn off the I with the AM This presupposes that the "I" exists. But it cannot, without a sense of being. So this duality is in fact a non-duality -- it exists as one.

[@tombesson7293]

"The map is not the territory." Alfred Korzybski

[@DJ-gs2uw]

🧡🙏🏽🧡🙏🏽🧡

[@gregoryallen0001]

is it the universal consciousness

[@gregoryallen0001]

is it the force

[@claudelebel49]

The subject can see everything except itself. I Am That which is aware of and contains everything.

[@gendomonk7655]

". we obtain similarities by disregarding differences, by a process of abstracting . in a world of only absolute differences, without similarities, recognition, and therefore, "intelligence", would be impossible . similarities appear only as a result of the action of our nerves system, which does not register absolute differences . therefore, we register similarities, which evaporate when our means of investigation become more suitable . similarities are read into nature by our nervous system, and so are structurally less fundamental than differences . less fundamental but not less important, as life and "INTELLIGENCE" would be totally impossible without abstracting" "whatever you say a thing is, it isn't" a. korzybski

[@marcpelletier1366]

Earth “If the word is not the thing, then what the hell is it? “-U.G.

[@gendomonk7655]

@@marcpelletier1366 it's a word! a verbal abstraction created by language by humans from "whatever is going on"... 1. something is going on (then we abstract) 2. immediate sensory experience then we abstract again on a diferent level 3. verbal level (words) not what is going on... words are on a different order of abstraction than "reality" it's impossible to explain in a few words... i didn't make this up if you intrested read Alfred Korzybski : science and sanity en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Korzybski take care

[@marcpelletier1366]

@@gendomonk7655 If you don't name it, what happens to that object?

[@gendomonk7655]

Marc Pelletier "object" is a story you created, whatever is happening is a process/ a happening, it doesn't happen on a verbal level we can't talk about it it's on a "silent" level, as soon as we do talk about our experiences we have to be aware that it is not what is happening only a "map" about it language is a map... "the map is not the territory" a.k.

[@marcpelletier1366]

@@gendomonk7655 When the many, becomes one, what happens to the one?

[@simonjones6128]

Beingness that placeless place

[@tim13354]

"..in the deep, dreamless sleep: nothing appears."..... But you still ARE. Complete with brain-waves. And since our problem is, essentially, that we are, and we shall, or fear we shall. cease to be at some point: can't see how this kind of rot addresses the issue.

[@tim13354]

On the contrary the assertion that you are not your body is the great fraud. The concept of 'you' refers to, and can only refer to the body....We deal with facts here, not superstition; medieval or otherwise.

[@stateofawakening1457]

brandensilverstar & tim13354 I believe your argument/discussion could be narrowed/concluded by considering where the boundary of “you” begins and ends.

[@Machielovic]

But at the moment of your deep sleep you cannot know and say that.