Surfing with Wind

[O Donna]

Partly true?

Now, take off those thoughts, fears, future, hopes and dreams...

Impractical? Sure.

Unthinkable? Pretty much.

Impossible? 'I' image so....

....................

[Wind]

[skogvokter]

..
..

..
..

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=R64xdfGDW7A

,,

[Wind]

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=XQrJyR0t67g

[O Donna]

A Samsaric Thought:

Without the dark, there would be no light.
Without the light, there would be no dark.

A thing to take away is that when one is, the other is not. It is as if to say, forgotten, oblivious to the other except via transition.

[EFO]

Posted by O Donna (here)
A Samsaric Thought:

Without the dark, there would be no light.
Without the light, there would be no dark.

A thing to take away is that when one is, the other is not. It is as if to say, forgotten, oblivious to the other except via transition.

How it could be if there will be no dark and no light?I mean no duality or any polarity...

[Ernie Nemeth]

I don't think I've ever posted here. Always like to come by and see what has been posted.

We need the dark, not because it is the polar opposite of light, but because we do not want to see. Dark is our invention, to blot out the light. Light and dark are metaphors for knowledge and ignorance. While we wish to dabble in form, our function will be obscured to us.

There is no dark because knowledge is total. And where there is light, there dark is no more. The opposite cannot be said to hold true - proving dark is not the opposite of light but merely an invention of a mind that wishes darkness were real.

[Anka]

I look in the night sky to see the stars / light that I must be able to separate from what is not light. So we see the opposite of light which is darkness.
i notice that the light begins at the border of darkness and the darkness begins with the border of light.
If there was only infinite light or only infinite darkness in an exercise of imagination? I could not see anything under any circumstances, because there would be no border. Therefore, maybe they don't need each other, or maybe if we see them both, we are actually in the middle of the notion of searching for truth, not knowing in fact what is white or black and maybe the notion of duality implies the need for both?

Because I wonder who is the one who finds that the white is white and the black is black?
The one who observes and finds out, that is me.
Perhaps I should first review my own opinion about my existence before observing and stating what I see or feel, for me surely the patience to live with the vision in polarity and fortunately has always led me to another stage, waiting and researching, not because I feel comfortable there, but because I always think and weigh in a form still unknown to me, my own choices.

If we see a blue ink written in symbols on a blank sheet of paper, indeed, only through the blue ink we can see that the sheet is white, or vice versa.

If we did not know what writing meant, we could say that it is a blue sheet of paper painted with some white paint, although it seems that the blue ink differs in a particular way in which intuition, patience and conscious evolutionary construction in a good way of any human being, over many millennia of time, can confirm that it was actually blue ink written on a white sheet of paper.But if we don't know what the paper really is?

Perhaps, in order to avoid reliving the same story endlessly, we should all learn HOW to "learn how to write" and "how to read" so that the future will no longer find us in a position of confusion between mixed facts, thoughts and realities, which depend on this duality, duality which in turn can lead us to polarity in a completely neutral sense, neutrality being in fact a third sense among many others defined by the unknown itself.

Maybe, when I know what a white sheet of paper means, I am the one who writes blue ink on it, and more than that, I will know the truth about what I write, and maybe what I write will be stored somewhere in the future. a space where there will be no need for anyone and nothing to seek after the truth?

It's not relativity or subjectivity but it's just the way I see my alignment somewhere in the middle and nowhere, because I
I have no fear I'll end here, and I have no despair that I will not live
enough to know exactly what I chose

[O Donna]

A knife, no matter how sharp, cannot cut itself, A finger cannot touch itself, and a lamp, however brightly it can light up the darkness, cannot illuminate itself.

[EFO]

How about be yourself?!?!

[O Donna]

Posted by EFO (here)
How about be yourself?!?!

Yes, of course, but conscious of 'that'? The phenomenon of it all?

One is One is One except when there is 'as' two (sometimes described as 'conscious of'')

Note: Just share thoughts along the way of a common walk-through-time.

[EFO]

Why (do) we need "exceptions" when one is one?!?!
The "conscious of 'that' " is related to "exception" as well as "phenomenon of it all",because we are choosing a certain "one" because there are more than two "one"...

Experiencing IN FULL and I really mean IN FULL both of the "one" what's left?

[O Donna]

What does the nose, know?

What does the I, sea?

What does the smell, tail?

[betoobig]

when we play a game we expect contrast, things to happen, and no contrast is posible without polarity. Light and dark make the contruction out of which we then can choose/select/define our preferences or desires. Without contrast we´ll never know what we truly want. Now, if we take this game personally it isn´t funny and we´ll find out when we go back to nonphysical that most of it is funny, nothing serious going on here. So... contrast gooooooood; so much love

[EFO]

Posted by betoobig (here)
when we play a game we expect contrast, things to happen, and no contrast is posible without polarity. Light and dark make the contruction out of which we then can choose/select/define our preferences or desires. Without contrast we´ll never know what we truly want. Now, if we take this game personally it isn´t funny and we´ll find out when we go back to nonphysical that most of it is funny, nothing serious going on here. So... contrast gooooooood; so much love

As a thought:
Flipping your proposition:"Without contrast we´ll never know what we truly want.":If we have what truly wanted,why do we need contrast?
Why do we need be serious when we could be funny?Of course,from time to time we don't need to be so funny,otherwise will ruin the poetry.

[Ernie Nemeth]

Light has degrees, we call it the spectrum of light. Darkness is total. It either is or is not. Not so with light, which, once it comes, never leaves, by definition. Darkness cannot obliterate light, but light can obliterate darkness. These are not the description of things equal but opposite. They both use the same frame of reference but one cannot emit or be sourced, while the other suffuses everything around us. Darkness is a condition defined by the lack of the thing that is absent and has no properties of its own. In fact it is accurate to say we are composed of light, this cannot be said of darkness.

So no, even in normal physical terms, darkness is not the opposite of light, it is the absolute that cannot exist because if it did, there would be no light.

Contrast is another matter. Contrast is the presence of shades of gray. It is the measure of the saturation in a medium. If saturation is too high, the contrast is wiped out and the scene becomes opaque. If saturation is lower, the image becomes clear due to surrounding ambient or background lighting being neither too high or too low. If saturation is still lower, not enough light will render the image hazy and finally undetectable. At no time in the range is darkness involved at all.

Darkness is an idea because darkness is not a thing. There is no source to darkness and so it can have no effects.

Darkness is an idea regarding not a new phenomena but the absence of one. What if there were no light? That is question that brought it into being. But there is light and so there can be no darkness, only relative degrees of light. But nowhere in the entire universe is there no light at all...

Once light has arrived, there can be no darkness...

[EFO]

Posted by Ernie Nemeth (here)
Light has degrees, we call it the spectrum of light. Darkness is total. It either is or is not. Not so with light, which, once it comes, never leaves, by definition. Darkness cannot obliterate light, but light can obliterate darkness. These are not the description of things equal but opposite. They both use the same frame of reference but one cannot emit or be sourced, while the other suffuses everything around us. Darkness is a condition defined by the lack of the thing that is absent and has no properties of its own. In fact it is accurate to say we are composed of light, this cannot be said of darkness.

So no, even in normal physical terms, darkness is not the opposite of light, it is the absolute that cannot exist because if it did, there would be no light.

Contrast is another matter. Contrast is the presence of shades of gray. It is the measure of the saturation in a medium. If saturation is too high, the contrast is wiped out and the scene becomes opaque. If saturation is lower, the image becomes clear due to surrounding ambient or background lighting being neither too high or too low. If saturation is still lower, not enough light will render the image hazy and finally undetectable. At no time in the range is darkness involved at all.

Darkness is an idea because darkness is not a thing. There is no source to darkness and so it can have no effects.

Darkness is an idea regarding not a new phenomena but the absence of one. What if there were no light? That is question that brought it into being. But there is light and so there can be no darkness, only relative degrees of light. But nowhere in the entire universe is there no light at all...

Once light has arrived, there can be no darkness...

There is an other form of darkness,not that one we all are used to it and know it and you describe it accurately.

[Ernie Nemeth]

I thought of an equivalent that is actually logical.

In electronics, back in the nineties, a phenomena was observed that caused super-conductivity on a very small scale. The theory that described this phenomena was based on the 'hole'. This 'hole' had the exact opposite properties of the electron and kept pace with the negative component of the effect but adding positive counter-enforcement. It was a strange way to describe an event - as the absence of the electron. It was only years later that the effect was attributed to the positron, the exact opposite of the electron and not an absence or lack but the presence of a new phenomena.

It may be that darkness is similar. It might have a cause, in which case it could be real. Maybe it has to do with the ether...

[EFO]

Posted by Ernie Nemeth (here)
I thought of an equivalent that is actually logical.

In electronics, back in the nineties, a phenomena was observed that caused super-conductivity on a very small scale. The theory that described this phenomena was based on the 'hole'. This 'hole' had the exact opposite properties of the electron and kept pace with the negative component of the effect but adding positive counter-enforcement. It was a strange way to describe an event - as the absence of the electron. It was only years later that the effect was attributed to the positron, the exact opposite of the electron and not an absence or lack but the presence of a new phenomena.

It may be that darkness is similar. It might have a cause, in which case it could be real. Maybe it has to do with the ether...

I understand and technical explanation is perfectly logical for everyone.

That form of "visible" darkness has noting to do with anything that the better illustrious scientists discovered or could know or achieved through available known or unknown science.

That form of darkness is simply IS,like positive or negative energy or field or as you said:ether.

In/inside that field,not that nothing exist,but everything is settle - there is no pleasure or pain,positive or negative,war or peace,god or satan,Vader or Skywalker or any opposites known or unknown.It's pure neutrality...no vibration,no frequency,no dimensions,no parallel worlds.Nothing.Total silence and stillness.

And as I understood it is a sort of "buffer field" to pass to.......................I don't know what is beyond that neutral field or how that world could look.I only know that this neutrality field is a buffering zone between this dual world,we all living in (humans,extraterrestrials,multi dimensional entities,living all over the galaxies,dimensions,worlds,Universes and that "world" beyond the neutrality field,if there is a world there,but I had a strong feeling that it is "something" beyond my comprehension.

[O Donna]

Rainbows are actually circular with parts hidden from view giving the appearance of a beginning and end.

“...it doesn't matter what end of the Magick pool you dive into, it's going to be the deep end. No matter where or how you start your journey, that is where you begin.”

--Allow Me to Introduce, An Insider's Guide to the Occult by Lon Milo DuQuette

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=0ejbaiUkfaE

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=El_LAaweUvg