fearlessinquirer wrote:
By "impersonal presence" do you mean choiceless awareness?
No.
A presence in which there is no further labeling.
Including the label of "no further labeling".
Of course in the very referencing, a label as "presence" is being used.
Can you sense that without being in relationship with that?
That is why........the earlier prattling.......it is to be found neither
in relationship nor in isolation.
The apperception of this........consumes even the attributed quality of
"findable".
To be in
relationship is to be without labeling the experience of being.
Well, that's a new connotation of the term "relationship".
Yes the absence of labeling, which is actually the absence of experiencing.
And since the absence of experiencing is also an experiencing.....
....the absence of the presence of experiencing/labeling
AND
the absence of absence of the presence of experiencing/labeling.
To
sense that is to give that a quality, a perfume, a flavor... and
certainly the instrument of perception, which is limited in itself,
cannot make apparent that which is limitless.
Yes.
To sense is another way to say ......to experience.
And experience is in time, is of time.
Thus durational and thus limited.
Look at the term "limitless".
It is as much limited as any other terming.
That there is something as limitless.......is a thought within the
domain of limitation.
That-which-is...........is neither limited.
Nor limitless.
Life is relationship.
Life, as typically or conventionally connoted.........is indeed a
collage of relationships.
As a display of what relationships could be like, if relationships could
ever be.
