Enlightened Cat

Unicorns couldn't create anything, or think that they are separate. Both of these assumptions are themselves the thoughts of separation. That is still the content of thought, which you are viewing, and thus could never be in. You can't read a story while being in a story. Sit with it and watch the "me" thought vanish. Thoughts don't achieve. End goals, and relieving boredom, are for unicorns. What is the end goal of listening to a song? Or feeling a nice breeze? Or being nice to someone? There are thoughts about what you should do or become, but the "you" in question appears and vanishes alongside those thoughts. For example, you can't want something if you're not imagining a "want" first. "You" and "thought" are the same occurrence, there is no difference. Thought couldn't want anything, unless you believe you're in the thought, which could never be the case since you're aware of the thought. You can't be inside something you're viewing. Universe is aware of thoughts and it is never defined by what it is aware of. You are being aware of the thought, not being in the thought. Universe is being aware of. Separate selves and loneliness are thoughts about separation which could never define anything that exists outside of thought. There is no entity out there called the "universe" plotting things, there are thoughts about the universe, which the universe is being.

Undercurrents pull at your heart Feeling so powerful it leads you on The waves of emotion wash over me. But can you see the ocean through the reef? Undercurrents drag at your heart Feeling so powerful it leads you on A new tide comes in and I'm washed away Forces stronger than hate are left in the wake Stronger than hate Anchored through the tidal waves Go on, take the bait You can't fight the currents of love! Lifts you from the deep Rescued when you're lost at sea Only surge you'll ever need You can't fight the currents of love! Stronger than hate Anchored through the hurricane Go on, no need to wait You can't fight the currents of love! Lifts you from the brink Rescued when you start to sink Only dream you'll ever need You can't fight the currents of love! One, two, three, four Motion on the ocean floor! Five, six, seven, eight Double bubble, swim some more! One, two, three, four Motion on the ocean floor! One, two, three, four Swishing fishes, bring it in! Five, six, seven, eight Triple ripple, shake your fins! One, two, three, four Swishing fishes, let's begin~! One, two, three, four Salmon jammin' everywhere! Five, six, seven, eight Slammin' clams, I just don't care! One, two, three, four Salmon jammin' everywhere! One, two, three, four Swimmin' undersea parade! Five, six, seven, eight Cutesy-wootsy, pink mermaid! One, two, three, four Swimmin' undersea parade!

You aren't AWAKE™ if you aren't conscious of an alien squirrel prancing around your room right now.

🎯❤️ 🎯❤️ 🎯❤️ 🎯❤️ "Santa can't believe in Santa" yep exactly haha

No, not truly. Because you are imagining. There can't be you imagining you. Yes. Any subject-object relation.

Yes. Imagining yourself as separate creates a desire about that separate self, and that desire is the emotion or feeling felt about that separate self. No thoughts would be better. I think the "opposite" is really just no thoughts about a self at all.

That's a good question. The feelings "play a part" in it, but aren't separation and division itself. The feelings are more like an intelligent reaction to serve the separation and division, and that separation and division is an imagination or thought which divides experience or makes a statement about experience. This creates a desire to "protect" myself from that division or thought. And that desire creates a certain feeling which serves it. Whether it is fear, jealousy, anger, etc. For example, if I fear something coming up in the future, the thought creates an idea of me in the future, and that thought feels bad because there can't be two of "me", one in the future and one in the present. This is the division created by thought or imagination. The fear is equivalent to the desire to avoid the future scenario, but what is not seen that there is no future scenario outside of the thought of one. The fear serves to protect the current me from the imaginary future me. And so you could say that this is a "feeling of separation." In the case of autism, if there is an idea like "I am maladaptive" or "I cause maladaptivity" or "I have to fix things that are maladaptive" or even "I am in a world/situation which is maladaptive", that causes you to imagine the world as a thing that lacks, relative to a future scenario where it is ideal and doesn't lack. It makes you look at the world as a set of "problems that need to be fixed." Which seems to fundamentally trickle down to this narrative of separation which often goes like "In the future I will finally be perfect and whole." Not to mention, it causes you to overlook the intelligence of what is occurring in front of you and it causes suppression, because you've put everything in a box of "maladaptive problems" without appreciating the dynamics of why they exist in the first place and what they serve to accomplish, aside from just being problematic for you. Similar to how someone who feels anxiety drinks alcohol in order to alleviate the "problem" of anxiety. It overlooks the aspect of it which is not maladaptive or a problem at all, but is simply there to serve you.

Maybe I understand this more now. Is it perhaps the belief that the opposite isn't true which ironically perpetuates the maladaptivity? Because it creates an imperative that something is broken or needs fixing, which is the fundamental narrative which drives the feelings of separation and division in the first place?

Why is that? Is it the idea that there is a thing which needs adjusting which is misunderstanding? Kind of like a finger that is pointing blame or something. For example, someone has an emotional outburst of some sort. Then it is thought that something needs adjusting, and then maybe the environment is adjusted by removing the thing that triggered it. This prevents the outburst from being perceived (which might be what you mean by suppression), and so that vilifies the outburst as something which needs adjusting, but it is actually a symptom of whatever initially caused it to be acted out. So maybe to say it more accurately, the outburst is not maladaptive at all, but an intelligent response to something perceived as a threat. Like how a cat hissing can be seen as aggressive or unwanted behavior, but if you make the goal "I want my cat to stop hissing", then you are removing a natural and vital defense mechanism and so it does not fix the initial cause at all (suppression). The proper question or inquiry is why does it hiss or what causes that hissing.

Thinking about bubbles is the leading cause of solipsism. Every solipsist is apparently trapped inside of a bubble of some sort. Wonder what would happen if they tried to pop the edge of their experience with a needle.

How is that? Meaning, nothing needs to be adjusted?

Meaning, the environment or situation is not adequate or appropriate? I guess that's a better way to describe it yeah.

That all makes sense to me. I definitely hold this sentiment that many areas around the human condition are in the "dark age" so to speak, like psychology, health, education, etc. It seems to be this visceral psychosomatic entanglement stemming from our inability to understand or perceive what we are. And I guess it percolates to "everything", as you said the lens-sphere isn't separate of the world-sphere. And it seems like the tendency of the mind to understand "things" and split the environment into parts of itself neglects the psychosomatic nature of it all. When I look at autism I personally don't see it as a deficit at all. It is just a way of processing that is maladaptive with an environment it seems. Then, like how I mentioned before, the maladaptive effects of the environment are categorized into this clinical entity or DSM called "autism." And then they become a "person who desires to go against the environment." It more so seems that the autistic way of being causes many misunderstandings which percolate into the environment, for both the autistic individual and even the psychologist diagnosing it. The misunderstandings are not really inherent to the autism, but the DSM would see it that way by calling the misunderstanding a "deficit which comes with autism." This turns the "problem/misunderstanding" into a clean and simple clinical entity called "autism", and then it tries to shape that clinical entity into something which is not autistic or less autistic to "fix the problem." The problem has now been transformed into a clinical entity. I guess this would be like the "suppression" which you mentioned earlier.

I really like this. Is this to say that the product of an environment is being seen or "understood" as an individual entity, such as with the label of autism? The environment causes certain reactions and those reactions are "understood" as a person/fish who has "autism" or some such thing?

Meaning, if there is a sense of "understanding", that is still a misunderstanding, because it creates a person who either understands or misunderstands, when they are both actually the same paradigm; of a person who can be affected by understanding or misunderstanding? Right, because these would denote a person who is always either innocent/blamed, or patient/impatient, thus still keeping them inside of that paradigm of someone who can be those things? I can see how there is not a person who does not desire to adhere to social norms. Because that seems to put that person in a position of "choosing", like "I desire to not like social situations" or something like that. I think more practically how it plays out is that they are in a situation which creates certain desires and beliefs. Perhaps they act out an emotion which causes a public disturbance. This is falsely understood as "I am a person who is bad socially", which veils what perpetuated the emotion in the first place.