Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Disable your ad blocker to continue using our website.
AlexW wrote: ↑Mon Jun 18, 2018 11:39 pm
@OP: What is space?
Ultimately: An idea, a concept.
In reality there is no space - no empty, unoccupied expanse of nothingness.
Reality is pure knowing/being - it does not extend from here to there. As such there is no distance and no space (between mind-made locations).
Space is the playground the mind has created to throw around its toys - bodies, objects, worlds...
It's not more real than the space a dream character occupies in a night time dream.
So in a sense ..what we believe to exist as an external world in which we live our lives is in fact nothing more real than that of a dream world that our brain/mind has constructed ....we are literally walking through our own brains.
So to answer the question what’s going on inside my brain, is to just look and see the answer is all around me in what appears to be an external world ...and this world appears to be a real life working model of what my brain is doing.
And so in a sense we are both inside and outside of ourselves at the same time. In reality there is neither inside or out...there’s just here now nowhere, everywhere infinitely.
.
The eternal now is always right here now, there is only one now. It doesn’t move or age, this now is also called Pure Awareness.
Pure Awareness...is the unchanging timeless still canvas on which all images move and change, appear,disappear and reappear. Inseparable from the canvas. Timeless awareness watching itself in time. Time is timeless. Timeless is time.
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jun 24, 2018 7:20 am
Pure Awareness...is the unchanging timeless still canvas on which all images move and change, appear,disappear and reappear. Inseparable from the canvas.
I can't quite see how an image can disappear from the canvas while at the same time be inseparable from it. Still, I know from experience that you are not one to let common sense get in the way of your fanciful notions and philosophical endeavours at the cutting edge of self delusion.
Harbal wrote: ↑Sun Jun 24, 2018 9:10 am
I can't quite see how an image can disappear from the canvas while at the same time be inseparable from it.
That’s because the image is an appearance of the imageless. A concept you still seem unable to grasp because you continue to over think what is being posited.
Still, I know from experience that you are not one to let common sense get in the way of your fanciful notions and philosophical endeavours at the cutting edge of self delusion.
The Self is the cut in that which is seamless...the ultimate grand delusion, unavoidably so in your empty fanciful notion.
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jun 24, 2018 10:10 am
That’s because the image is an appearance of the imageless.
And not because your assertion is an expression of the meaningless?
A concept you still seem unable to grasp because you continue to over think what is being posited.
I'm very reluctant to grasp anything that is set on making an idiot of me and, while I agree that over thinking can sometimes be counter productive, your strategy of not thinking at all hardly seems a better course.
The Self is the cut in that which is seamless...the ultimate grand delusion, unavoidably so in your empty fanciful notion.
Well, after seeing what was in your fanciful notion I thought I would be better leaving mine empty.
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jun 24, 2018 12:33 pm
No can opener ever opened a can, only thought opened the can looked on by awareness inseparable from the thought.
Thought may well be able to open cans but I think you will find that it still needs a can opener to do it.
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jun 24, 2018 12:33 pm
No can opener ever opened a can, only thought opened the can looked on by awareness inseparable from the thought.
Thought may well be able to open cans but I think you will find that it still needs a can opener to do it.
Yes of course, without the awareness of an object, there is no object.
Knowledge of an object is known by that which is aware of the object, not from the object itself, which is just a thought witnessed by awareness.
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jun 24, 2018 1:05 pm
Yes of course, without the awareness of an object, there is no object.
Knowledge of an object is known by that which is aware of the object, not from the object itself, which is just a thought witnessed by awareness.
So you are saying that my can opener plays no part in my awareness of it? Then what about its inability to open cans? Does that come from the can opener or is that merely my awareness preventing me from opening my tin of beans?
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Jun 24, 2018 1:05 pm
Yes of course, without the awareness of an object, there is no object.
Knowledge of an object is known by that which is aware of the object, not from the object itself, which is just a thought witnessed by awareness.
So you are saying that my can opener plays no part in my awareness of it?
There is no knowledge of a play ever taking place without an audience.
As awareness, the can opener is the experience awareness is having...but awareness it self is not an experience..it’s the experiencing. Subject and Object are one in the same moment.
Then what about its inability to open cans? Does that come from the can opener or is that merely my awareness preventing me from opening my tin of beans?
The ability for a can opener to open cans is knowledge gained from experience. All knowledge of experience is only possible because of awareness. The experience and the awareness is one unitary action.
As Awareness..Am I playing a “part”..or Am I the “part” I’m playing?