Veritas Aequitas's illusory God

[Dontaskme]

Do you believe in death

I do not believe in death or anything at all
I have no need for any faith based position

I don't beleive in death either.

When I talk about 'me' dying, I'm talking about the appearance of 'me' disappearing, when it dissolves back into it's formless unaware state that knows no birth or death that is this immediate reality now here nowhere.

The appearance is relative,it is the dualistic knowledge of this unknown nondual existence.



.

[surreptitious57]

My body will of course die but that is a fact so belief is not required
The older I get the more I am letting go in anticipation of my death

I cannot be afraid of anything I cannot actually experience which is why I have no fear of death anymore
Dying might be painful but death is the ending of suffering so I can easily accept it when the time comes

[Dontaskme]

My body will of course die but that is a fact so belief is not required
The older I get the more I am letting go in anticipation of my death

My point is that no one has ever experienced death, so the concept is just an idea that can never be an experience. We can't know what we have never experienced, so death will aways be an idea of what we believe it is, we can never really know for sure anything about death or life except the story we make up about it.

When we go to sleep at night especially in deep dreamless sleep there is no sense of I existing. But upon waking that sense of I comes back online.
Maybe that's all death is, just going to sleep until you wake up again.

What if dying to the self is waking up to no self, and waking up to no self is dying to the self. Both the waking world and the world of sleep is couched within the same one reality aka nothingness being everything.

This is only my opinion ..not saying its how it is, or how we should think it is, I'm only sharing how I see the way it is.

.

[surreptitious57]

Life and death can be seen as two sides of the existentialist coin but I think there are three stages not two
Transition between non existence and birth / between birth and death / between death and non existence
The period between birth and death is infinitesimal while the other two periods are infinite by comparison

[TimeSeeker]

The period between birth and death is infinitesimal while the other two periods are infinite by comparison

From whose perspective do you make that assertion?

[surreptitious57]

I make it from my own perspective but it is an objective truth not a subjective one
The Universe existed for billions of years before I was born and will after I am dead

[Dontaskme]

Life and death can be seen as two sides of the existentialist coin but I think there are three stages not two
Transition between non existence and birth / between birth and death / between death and non existence
The period between birth and death is infinitesimal while the other two periods are infinite by comparison

What if the transitional period between being dead and being born is instantaneous?
How do we not know that, because in the non-awareness state there is no concept of time, so the transition for all we know is instantaneous.

[surreptitious57]

We know that it is not instantaneous as time exists independent of our perception
So had we no understanding of time then we might think that it was instantaneous

[Dontaskme]

We know that it is not instantaneous as time exists independent of our perception
So had we no understanding of time then we might think that it was instantaneous

I don't see it that way..I see the perceiver as timeless, it has no concept of time.. To know time is a relative appearance within the timeless perceiver...appearances are many of the one perceiver that itself cannot be percieved by itself, for its all the infinite absolute relative to itself.
The moment you say "I am", the entire universe comes into being (knowledge) along with its creator.
In reality there is only perception. The perceiver and the perceived are conceptual, the fact of perceiving is actual. The Absolute is the birthplace of perceiving. It makes perception possible.

I've rephrased something I said earlier down below..

What if the transitional period between being dead (not-knowing awareness) and being born (knowing awareness) is instantaneous?

Like when you are in deep dreamless sleep at night, there is no knowing present, then upon waking up from sleep there is instant knowing once again.

.

[Veritas Aequitas]

I don't think anything lives or dies, life is just absolute infinity expressing itself as this human experience that believes it is born and one day will die, in the story of I which is just another feature appearance of absolute infinity.

There you go again conflating and equivocating words [bolded] in their different senses.

You are mixing up the different senses, i.e.

• 1. Common sense
  2. Scientific
  3. Epistemological
  4. Metaphysical

Your focus is on the metaphysical which churns out necessary lies [absolute infinity, God, Absolute, ONENESS, and the likes].

You are conflating anything lives or dies, life which are relevant to the senses in 1-3 with the non-sense metaphysical 'absolute infinity' aka God.
I wonder you understand such conflation and equivocation reflect intellectual dishonesty on your part.
But because you are psychological desperate inside [subconsciously] you will not give a damn you are dishonest [subconsciously] or not but your deceptive mind will aggressively reinforce the necessary lie.

To be perfectly honest with you Veritas Aequitas. I have absolutely no idea whatsoever what you are talking about, really, and truely, I have no clue as to what you are trying to say to me. Nothing you have ever said to me in your responses have computed with this one here, me. Mostly, when ever I read your repsonses, all I seem to hear is these high sounding unecessary words that go right over my head, and that all I hear from you is not that much different than the sound of an hysterical barking dog going woof! woof! woof!, it's basically all meaningless dogmatic jargon that makes absolutely no sense to me at all.

You have repeatedly accused me of being a liar and dishonest,aggressive and psychological desperate, just because I dare to even attempt albeit in a rather messy way to describe my own awakening, the realisation that I am just one of a unique never to be repeated expressions of absolute infinity.

I can only know the God of my own understanding AV. And that doesn't make me any of the things you have accused me of having, so all that happens when I read your ideas is shake my head and say thank God none of this is true, for I can only be true to myself. What you honestly think about me is none of my business, I really couldn't care less.

Only I know my own mind, not you.

As soon as someone confidently asserts with absolute certainty, without question that God is an impossibilty makes me very suspicious, I personally don't believe there is such a ''someone'' here to take that authoritative position,except in the dream of separation, which is substanceless. So dream on, give it all you got, nothing ever happened to you, because God aka infinity doesn't take sides or positions, but just allows them to be nonetheless.

This is a Philosophy Forum
That is why I stated your philosophical knowledge is very shallow.

My last para above may need further explanation but the rest are average 'philosophical stuff'.

You should upgrade your knowledge on Philosophy rather than faulting me not understanding [not necessary agree] what I have posted.
When you don't understand the above to counter it, you will continue to make the same mistake, which you are doing like the points that followed.

Note I have not accused you personally as being an intentional or typical liar.
My point is theists are engaging with a deception, falsehoods, lies and the like of a belief in
an illusory God.

[Dontaskme]

This is a Philosophy Forum
That is why I stated your philosophical knowledge is very shallow.

Knowledge is shallow because it informs the illusory nature of existence. It's a fiction appearing real.

Not-knowing is the only real knowledge. There is a subtle difference.

You should upgrade your knowledge on Philosophy rather than faulting me not understanding [not necessary agree] what I have posted.

You should upgrade your manners and stop degrading others on what YOU THINK they should and shouldn't know. I said I don't understand your disgusting evil perception of what you believe and think is the human mind/brain...not that I don't understand the human mind/brain/ consciousness, I do understand, but in my way only, not yours or anyone elses version.

When you don't understand the above to counter it, you will continue to make the same mistake, which you are doing like the points that followed.

So basically if no one agrees with your version of how you perceive reality, according to you,since you are informing us all of this crap, and if they don't understand according to your standard that you have set..then they will continue to make mistakes when trying to counter the shit load of evil diatribe that is your posts. . Well, I've never heard such egotistical tripe in all my life.

Note I have not accused you personally as being an intentional or typical liar.

Yes you have, you've implied it, all directly at me and my view. Just be honest with yourself and admit it, you've implied I need to upgrade my knowledge because it doesn't fall into your personal model of what you deem is correct and real. You basically dictate to others what they should and shouldn't know.

My point is theists are engaging with a deception, falsehoods, lies and the like of a belief in
an illusory God.

You have absolutely no proof of that whatsoever, your perception of what you think other people know and do not know is disgusting and full of self centred egotistical self righteousness. Your what's classed in the dualistic sense a materialistic idol worshipper, and to hell with anyone else that gets in your way.

.

[Veritas Aequitas]

This is a Philosophy Forum
That is why I stated your philosophical knowledge is very shallow.

Knowledge is shallow because it informs the illusory nature of existence. It's a fiction appearing real.

Not-knowing is the only real knowledge. There is a subtle difference.

Knowledge [JTB] is the foundation and structure that strengthens the basis of truth and reality.

Not-knowing i.e. without a foundation and structure of support one's claim of truth, then anything goes which to the extreme ends up with the father of all objects of illusion, i.e. God.

You should upgrade your knowledge on Philosophy rather than faulting me not understanding [not necessary agree] what I have posted.

You should upgrade your manners and stop degrading others on what YOU THINK they should and shouldn't know. I said I don't understand your disgusting evil perception of what you believe and think is the human mind/brain...not that I don't understand the human mind/brain/ consciousness, I do understand, but in my way only, not yours or anyone elses version.

It is not what I THINK is the truth of reality but rather I made it a point to support my views from the 'shoulders of giants' from the philosophical community, Science and other justified knowledge.

What you are doing is merely relying on ONLY one person's 'experience' or encounters, i.e. only YOURS and no one else which is vulnerable to the devil of subjectivity, i.e. personal subjective opinions.
This is what schizos and other perverts [not you directly but to a very minor degree] would do, i.e. insisting their own experiences justify the truth of reality and they end up committing all sorts of evil and violent acts.

[TimeSeeker]

Not-knowing is the only real knowledge. There is a subtle difference.

OK, genius. What is the shape of the Earth? Flat, Round or oblate?

I say: 'Given the presented options - oblate is the most precise description'
You say 'I don't know! Not-knowing is the only real knowledge'

Next time you get on an airplane ask the pilot if he knows where he is going

You should upgrade your manners and stop degrading others on what YOU THINK they should and shouldn't know. I said I don't understand your disgusting evil perception of what you believe and think is the human mind/brain...

Nobody understands that. We just have MODELS so that we can talk ABOUT it. I perceive my mind/brain as a computer. Is it a computer - don't care. By conceptualizing my mind as a computer - it helps me talk about my mind without sounding like I just vomited my breakfast.

not that I don't understand the human mind/brain/ consciousness, I do understand, but in my way only, not yours or anyone elses version.

And that is fine, but if you can't communicate it - then that is knowledge only YOU can use. I can't understand your mind - you can't understand my mind. So why bother speaking about minds with other people then?

So basically if no one agrees with your version of how you perceive reality, according to you,since you are informing us all of this crap, and if they don't understand according to your standard that you have set..then they will continue to make mistakes when trying to counter the shit load of evil diatribe that is your posts. . Well, I've never heard such egotistical tripe in all my life.

Have you heard the story of the kid who thought everybody is an asshole? He went to one party, another party, 10 parties. He met 50 different people - all of them egotistical ASSHOLES! Every single one! Next weekend - same thing! The weekend after - AGAIN. 500 people he met - all of them ASSHOLES!

At what point do you actually ask this question: Hey! Maybe it's me?

Yes you have, you've implied it, all directly at me and my view. Just be honest with yourself and admit it, you've implied I need to upgrade my knowledge because it doesn't fall into your personal model of what you deem is correct and real. You basically dictate to others what they should and shouldn't know.

Nobody is telling you what to do or what to know. But if you want to COMMUNICATE with other people and have a fruitful CONVERSATION. The least you can do is to try and learn the language.

You have absolutely no proof of that whatsoever, your perception of what you think other people know and do not know is disgusting and full of self centred egotistical self righteousness. Your what's classed in the dualistic sense a materialistic idol worshipper, and to hell with anyone else that gets in your way.

But I do have the right to decide who I interact with. Because my time is my own. And so even if you are Einstein but you speak like a lunatic - I need to decide how much of my time I am prepared to give you until you bless me with your wisdom.

And that's not just me - that is how most people think. They will ostracise you because you speak "funny". So if you don't want to be ostracised, and you are Einstein. And you have knowledge that the world MUST know! Then I have bad news for you - you NEED to learn to communicate!

Otherwise you are going to take your knowledge to the grave.

[TimeSeeker]

Knowledge [JTB] is the foundation and structure that strengthens the basis of truth and reality.

JTB has no foundation: the problem of regress.

Lets assess this claim in accordance with JTB: Tomorrow humanity may or may not go extinct.

Is it justified? Yes. Other species have gone extinct in the past. Claiming that it will happen to humanity is therefore justified.
Is it true? Yes. The "may or may not" claim is exhaustive - it evaluates to true.
Do I believe it. Yes.

Therefore, according to JTB it is knowledge.
I will gladly trade such 'knowledge' for toilet paper

[Veritas Aequitas]

Knowledge [JTB] is the foundation and structure that strengthens the basis of truth and reality.

JTB has no foundation: the problem of regress.

Lets assess this claim in accordance with JTB: Tomorrow humanity may or may not go extinct.

Is it justified? Yes. Other species have gone extinct in the past. Claiming that it will happen to humanity is therefore justified.
Is it true? Yes. The "may or may not" claim is exhaustive - it evaluates to true.
Do I believe it. Yes.

Therefore, according to JTB it is knowledge.
I will gladly trade such 'knowledge' for toilet paper

I understand JTB is not absolute, i.e. it has limitations e.g. Gettier's but JTB is the best available and it is useful.
Science is JTB.

From JTBs it can be proposed humans could be extinct from a rogue meteor/comet.
Therefore scientists had spend millions or billions of dollars and will continue in finding way to prevent it just in case a rogue meteor appear out the blue and heading Earth's way and will crash onto Earth, say, within 10,000 years from now.

If you denounce JTB, then scientists should just stop finding preventive measures?
Prevention [arising from JTB speculations] is still better than cure.

If the speculation do not appear to be true, at least all is not lost on that insurance policy and scientists can can exploit the arising technologies for other purposes.