touchstones sort of leaving out or only weakly interacting with "wisdom" and morality ("at least one sense in which"):
These could be the subjects of entire books (though they don't have to be; it's an implicit, self-dawning understanding, that takes care of itself; it's just "really deep and important" vis-a-vis all of this re sort of "global restructuring of mind" but that's a potentially misleading phrase (see "locality and concreteness" dialogue, elsewhere in document. also concepts in the pedagogical/bridge-building distinction breadth-first vs depth-first discussions, re "depth" and "tangledness"/"diffuseness"). See David Chapman's Meaningness stuff, too, again re the immediately below):
(Note: a sense)
[in no particular order]
at least one sense in which there's no such thing as language, never has been
at least one sense in which there are no abstractions, never have been
at least one sense in which there's no people, never has been
at least one sense in which the boundary or separation between all of "body" and "mind", "inside" and "outside," "self" and "world" are illusory (and other important senses in which they are not illusory)
at least one sense in which there is no ultimate, omni-commensurable ground truth/ontology/actuality/basis/reality, never has been ("groundlessness")
at least one sense in which sensations can't directly control or interact with other sensations
at least one sense in which [there's] "no escape" / [there's] "just this"
at least one sense in which each moment (~self;~self+world), each momentary [self-]constitution / [self-]re-constitution is “separate” [big air quotes around “separate”]
at least one sense in which "ought"/"goodness" is prior to, upstream of, "is", "ontology", "truth" (no conflation, here, re correspondance theory, nor any [necessary] commitment to that)
at least one sense in which nothing (no “thing”) is eternal, everything (every “thing”, “everywhere) (cf. “no objects anywhere”), is impermanent, non-eternal
at least one sense in which meaning, goodness, and badness only/exclusively lay between (and so while nothing is eternal, cf. above, neither is anything meaningless [cf. nihilism]) [also symbols, also reference ]
at least one sense in which aboutness ("intentionality"), including in the sense of "thinking about," tends to be confused, overused, a misapprehension of phenomenology and thinking, planning, designing, acting, writing, etc., and also it is not monolithic, not a single thing (and not to reify it in any which way)
at least one sense in which there is no single sense in which [sic] there is “existing/being”, “causes and effects”, and much more (unity, perfection, completeness, wholeness, nothingness, separateness, truth, reality, god's-eye-views, facts of the matter, beginnings, endings, everything…)
at least one sense in which we only experience representations
at least one sense in which all sensations (and/or objects or perception, appearances, seemingness…) are interpreted and there is no “given” perception whatsoever
at least one sense in which there is "phenomenal isotropy, non-particularity" (not exactly the same thing as Ingram's centerlessness (or agencylessness))
at least one sense in which any “[deliberate] action”--anything besides spontaneous, “pure” self-caringly “listening”--is a “cope,” in the most gentle sense, is not-listening to oneself, is not taking into account “ALL” “parts” of oneself
at least one sense in which love and service are the “ultimate” answer to the “reality” of personal suffering (in no way precluding possible fallibility, ongoing learning in part through unfortunate mistakes, uncertainties, impulsiveness, nonmonotonicity, and potentially causing harm through “ignorance in the guise of competent or wise benevolence,” etc.)
at least once sense in which there's no (long-run) need for suffering (and/but there's a way it's doing it's very best for you, possibly confused-ly, until it's no longer needed)
at least one sense in which "you" and "suffering" are "on the same side", like, you've been holding the "suffering control panel" all along, and there's a way to get access or authorization that's not suppression, not layering or papering over, there's just "pressing the off button, simple as [sic]" (realizing that "same side", and getting access, which is more like realizing you had it all along, that authorization, realization process is in part that whole-bodymind-complete, whole-meditation-complete, global wayfinding puzzle, involving self-compassion, self-alignment, self-kindness, self-wisdom, and is also intimately related to groundlessness). There are deeper and deeper and deeper layers of this.
at least once sense in which there's no (long-run) need for self-ing (and/but there's a way it's doing it's very best for you, possibly confused-ly, until it's no longer needed)
at least one sense in which nothing matters, including there being no ultimate judgment or consequences, no duty, no responsibility, no necessity no obligation, can just do what want (which is then paradoxically, constructively spontaneously meaningful, mattering enough, precisely and sufficiently)
at least one sense in which you are not an extensional body moving through a three-dimensional cartesian-esque space
at least one sense in which selfishness and self-servingness "all the way down" is ok and good
at least one sense in which experience, apparentness, seemingness, and more, is “empty,” like this: “what you ‘see’ is all there is; there’s nothing behind it” and “and even that too is empty”
at least one sense in which there are no things, as such; there’s nothing thing-like
at least one sense in which there are no generalities or (let alone) universals [/—nor universals]; there is only radically concrete and situated particulars (and of course at least one sense in which there are also no particulars)
at least one sense in which there are no infinities
at least one sense in which all there is now, is what’s now
at least one sense in which all this is is “just this.”
at least one sense in which you can, long-run, function just fine without an "enduring stable identity concept"; there is only radically concrete flux that sort of has no pattern to fall under an enduring concept
at least one sense in which nothing ends, including the sense in which “you will always have happened.” At least on sense in which “endings” (and lots of other things) are “negated without further implication” [See Mipham’s Beacon of Certainty]
at least one sense in which everything ends / at least one sense in which this ends [/ it's ending in each moment]
at least one sense in which everything is determined and couldn’t be otherwise
at least one sense in which everything is interconnected / at least one at least [sic] narrow sense in which there is no separation
at least one sense in which "being good," any of someone "being good" can only be ultimately effortless, costless, and, critically, spontaneous / "it's just happening" / "it just happens" / "that's just the way it is"
at least one sense in which there is no single, one most good and correct way to a express a particular truth
at least one sense in which there's no difference between an enlightened and unenlightened mind; at least once sense in which being enlightened changes nothing (and other senses in which lots of things change); and at least two senses in which there's no such thing as enlightenment (or meditation)
at least one sense in which there's no perfection. at least one sense in which perfect control, understanding, or certainty don't exist [adapted from David Chapman, mistakes mine]
[there should be an entry somewhere in here that teases out something about when something in the space of locality does [a lot] and doesn't apply]
at least one sense in which no difference / no boundary, between "inside" and "outside"
at least one sense in which everything is inside you, and/or/rather at least all experience
at least one sense in which the "the future", or one's experience of the future, is ultimately empty, groundless, and "liquid," at least for a time, in the sense in which it phenomenologically and functionally "re-seats" itself, where it lives, how it works..
at least one sense in which the past and future are "now"
at least one sense in which experience, sensations, perceptions, any experiencing self-illuminate, belong to themselves, are self-evident (see also luminosity and vividness) [Ingram: "The field lights up itself totally, without division, without restraint, without any barrier or gap, so disconnection is impossible."]
at least one sense, long-run, letting sensations be just they are is assures the best possible outcome and can trustingly rest into that (cf. self-liberating)
at least one sense in which "there is nothing outside of it" (cf. emptiness, nonduality, etc.)
at least one sense in which self and world are themselves interrelated, constructed interpretations “all” the way down
narrow sense in which (mere) understanding is all you need to do
at least one sense in which things which you thought were just “the world,” “how things are” actually turn out to be “you, also”, “map” (versus “territory”), “representation” (in some sense), not-arbitrary, still-dependent but non-arbitrarily malleable, changeable, something that flows according to ultimately spontaneous causes and conditions // self, goals, world co-arise together
at least one sense in which meditation, wayfinding, etc., have to undergo deep corrections, which involve de-entrenching, of deep concepts/ideas of meditation, wayfinding (which happens / can happen during the process of doing these), and one sort of has to correct out of the concepts or ideas of these entirely, with no remainder, long-run
at least one sense in which, long-run, there is "flatness," “no depth” / ?perfect-stillness / perfect determinism / like a reversible, liquid state machine that is driven by external inputs, driven by the "world," "the whole thing all at once", no need for "self-ing", in a good way
at least one sense in which there's no need for a particular kind of self-ing, self-reference, or a particular sense if “internality” (though interoception is still a thing)
at least one sense in which you are the (your representation of) the world, without remainder
at least one sense in which safety → surrender → “control”(+surrender) →/= alignment/participation
at least one sense in which, for those with, or who had, gender/orientation/presentation/role stuff, it’s self-"sorted", aligned, untangled, all the way down, beyond labels and concepts and "you know what to do," through and through, up to unknown unknowns, and so on (draft)
at least one sense in which (long-run) there's no watcher (cf. centerlessness; no observer, no center point) and no doer (cf. agencylessness; no controller, no-will-er) (Daniel Ingram formulation, mistakes mine; I also like "no particularity".)
at least one sense in which (long-run) there's a lining up, a synchrony, an in-phase-ness, a non-overhang, a non-folding or tucking, in the having of experience
at least one sense in which consciousness becomes non-choppy, non-discontinuous, non-jumpy, non-joggy, non-wrinkly/non-fold-y, non-depthy-y, and so-then "liquid" and zero-lag-phase-synced/paced parallel and reversibly (to some degree) most especially (in some sense) serialized (both experience and action, in some sense, at least in part, up to surprise and unknown unknowns)
at least one sense in which all stories (about the self or otherwise) are untrue/false
at least one sense in which awareness, experiencing is effortless, spontaneous, requires nothing to be done, just happens, is already happening
at least one sense in which at least once sense [sic] of the idea of "truth," acted upon, perfomed, communicated, coordinated around is a "consequentialist calculation," as sort of "groundlessly represented"
at least one sense in which bad isn't bad, that badness is permissible, that generally suffering is unnecessary because there's better things for the system to reach for, "preference is satisfying/enough" [cf. good and bad are not cosmic; they lie between; the cosmos/kosmos is in you]
at least one sense in which the whole cosmos, and all of time, "passes through,"" loops through your body, the whole phenomenal field, with a thought, and there’s nothing outside of you
at least one sense in which "thought" is a narrow confused version of something that can be done, or is spontaneous, throughout the whole phenomenological field and body
at least one sense in which there’s no such thing as before and after your death, and before and after your death properly reference or account for something experientially now (and empty, in the technical sense) and "the whole thing is groundless"
at least one sense in which stories, art, all media, all language, has no essence, is empty in perhaps a slightly counterintuitive or once removed manner, and is properly understood and whole-embodied-ly generated inseparably from audience-in—groundlessness
at least one sense in which the ((~whole) phenomenal/phenomenological) field "updates" itself, renews itself, spontaneously, effortlessly, costlessly [if you only (come to) let it]
at least one sense in which it's not your job to determine right or wrong, true or false, the facts of the matter, to judge or self-judge, to figure, to figure out, to be creative, to create; it's "spontaneity's" job; it's "groundlessness's" job.
at least one sense in which mind is nowhere and nothing, no such thing
at least one sense in which "inside" as well as "not just" "outside" becomes-known-to-be-such-that both are equally "objective" [yet each still empty] in the at-least-one-sense-in-which no subjectivity remains [in this sense or aspect "nonduality" could be considered, amongst lots of other things, sort of a "determinism upgrade"]
at least one sense in which "internality" is a learned strategy
at least one sense in which there is no fact of the matter that is not "ultimately" empty and nebulous and "spontaneous" i.e. not up to you per se
at least one sense in which you don't need to figure anything out
at least one sense in which there's nothing to figure out
at least one sense in which (a) there's no platonic, "looks the same from any angle," context-free knowledge in a vacuum; (b) everything learned is somehow learned for; (c) this learning just happens
at least one sense in which there's nothing that's not ok to experience
at least one sense in which everything is experienced for the last time
[temp catchall; draft] at least one sense in which, long-run, there's nothing left to do, nothing to be done, nothing left but death (in a good way; cf. parinirvana type things), impermanence and pattern are one, or rather everything is both "immortal" / "platonic" and impermanent / non-eternal (cf. emptiness is form and form is emptiness, cf. pattern and nebulosity, pace David Chapman's Meaningness, and cf. David Chapman's no god; no god's-eye-view) ;;;;;;;;;;;;; related: nowhere to go, nothing to do, never left, never were anywhere else, never could have, no discontinuity between before and "then your life will start, then you can do the thing", just this, this is is, no such thing as wayfinding, contra wayfinding, wayfinding should eat itself or it should never have been, cf. suffering, death, void / oblivion / nothingness / nibanna cf. never prospectivity recognized, never realized never not something [sic]
[more elaboration of determinism type stuff] at least one sense in which you are totally determined by your globality of inputs and self-inputs (cf. everything is empty, the experience qua the experience of it)
(see also: David Chapman's meaningness work; Daniel Ingram's work; Greg Goode's work)