Why humans can't get rid of their egos ?

[Age]

But WHY pretend?

WHY NOT just be one's Real and True Self ALWAYS.

People only pretend, out of fear, because of judgement and/or punishment.

When the Truth IS there is absolutely NOTHING to fear ANYWAY.

Fear is important.

Is this from the nondual perspective or from the dual perspective?

Even birds and mice fake their deaths, play dead out of fear at the thought of being eaten by a cat. [/quote]

Do these things, which are just "illusions", as you call them, play 'illusionary' dead or play 'real', and/or 'really', dead? And, do they do either of these out of real fear or just illusionary fear?

If fear ends you die.

Who/what is a 'you', which could even die?

How can an eternally NOW die?

How could some thing, which is not even alive, nor dead, die?

Why?

The unconscious self knows no death, the conscious self knows death and it doesn't want to die, it is unconscious of there being no such state as death, but is conscious of impending death. The conscious state is knowing. The unconscious state is not-knowing, both knowing and not knowing are present in the same instant...else reality wouldn't work the way it does.

So, WHY is so called "fear" important?

What you said here, as far as I could tell, is TRYING TO explain MORE of WHY reality works the way it does instead of WHY "fear" is important.

Also, if knowing fear AND not knowing fear are present in the same instant, then HOW and WHY is that supposedly 'important'?

Who/what would that knowing/not knowing "fear" actually be supposedly important to?

The fear is innate in every living thing,

But I have NO fear.
For there is NO THING to fear, for Me.
And, I am living. (Or, if I have NO innate fear, then does that mean I am NOT living?)

So what is it that "you" "dontaskme" fear?

And WHY would you "fear" such things?

What is the WORST that could possibly happen to the "you"

it's there by design, designed by infinite intelligence,

Is 'infinite intelligence' living?

If yes, then is fear innate in this living thing?
If no, (to the first question), then HOW can a NON living thing design some thing like fear?

And, if a non-living thing designed fear, then HOW did "it" instill fear in EVERY living thing.

Or, if 'infinite intelligence' IS living, and living innately with fear, but It also designed fear, then HOW could this possibly be?
If fear is innate in EVERY living thing, and 'infinite intelligence' OBVIOUSLY was ALWAYS around, living, then what came first; having fear innately within It, or, It designing fear?

there has to be fear present and that's what keeps this whole dynamic of living ..living... and not being killed off in droves.

But there is only an infinite NOW, without ANY actual separation, (according to the nondual perspective), so WHAT could possibly be killed off, in droves, or even at all?

There is just far too much going on in life to explain it all...explaining everything would take an eternity to explain it all.

But I think a LOT, some times, can be explained in a VERY SHORT time. A LOT can be explained about a LOT of things in VERY FEW words, also.

Saying, "There is just far to much going on in life to explain it all" some might SEE as just being an excuse, or a way out of TRYING, to NOT be questioned in regards to what they THINK they know.

Everything is constantly changing, so as soon as something is explained, it changes dynamic, and a new explanation is needed.

.

Really? Are you absolutely SURE of this? Would a new explanation be needed by now? (Has YOUR explanation changed dynamically by the time you are reading this now?)

Could a now new explanation explain that although EVERY thing IS constantly-changing, explanations CAN some times last a "Life-time"? Like, for example; The explanation that; 'EVERY thing IS constantly-changing', last a 'long time'? This explanation, after all, could ONLY really change if, and only IF, EVERY thing STOPPED-changing. And, when do "we" think that is going to happen?

So, really JUST MAYBE when SOME things are explained a new explanation is REALLY NOT needed AT ALL. CAN some explanations actually last a Life-time?

When "you" "dontaskme" expressed that 'Everything is constantly changing', was that an explanation of the truth, or of a falsehood?

If it was the former, then WHEN will a "new" explanation of this BE NEEDED?

[Dontaskme]

Dam: So that idea about a belief belonging to someone has come from you, the you that denies it has a belief, and yet assumes others can have one...

But I do NOT assume that "others" can have BELIEFS. "Others", themselves, TELL me that they have BELIEFS.

I get that and I agree..you cannot assume someone has a belief until they tell you. I agree.
I'm starting to understand you better. So thanks. It is only my own misunderstanding of what you write that confuses myself of what's being said. Not that you are being confusing...is that fair to say?

In fact some "others" have BELIEFS that are so strong that they BELIEVE that even I MUST HAVE BELIEFS also. Some people's BELIEFS are so strong that they INSIST that I MUST HAVE BELIEFS, otherwise I would die.

I think what happens here is that if a person can think they have a belief, they will also believe that another person can have a belief as well..is that what you mean?

.

[Dontaskme]

So in essence Age, you are not making any sense are you when you say you have no belief,

To WHO?

To Me it makes PERFECT sense that when I am NEITHER believing nor disbelieving any thing, then I have NO belief at all.

Does that NOT makes sense to "dontaskme"?

Yes, it does make sense to me too, that it makes perfect sense to you. I agree with you.

Dontaskme
because it's you who is making up the idea in the first place, the idea of belief belongs to you... it's your own grown concept....that you then deny having...you remind me of someone trying to wash away blood using blood.

If me saying; I have NO beliefs, reminds you of a human being trying to wash away blood using blood, then I accept that that is what you remember.

I am just NOT sure WHY you would remember, and then say, such a thing. Would you like to elaborate and/or explain WHY you wanted us to KNOW what I remind you of?

Because you must know the concept (belief) to be able to say you don't have one. So you know the concept even if you don't have the concept?
Right?
Then to say you don't have the knowledge that is the known concept (belief)and that is like trying to rid the concept known that you don't have by using the concept that you must know to rid that knowing away with what you know you don't have? ..does that make sense to you?

.

[Dontaskme]

But WHY pretend?

WHY NOT just be one's Real and True Self ALWAYS.

The true self aka the dog will dump it's load of shit on the pavement in full view of all around, especially it's human owner.

WHY "especially" in front of its 'human owner'?

Are you trying to suggest that dogs PREFER to excrete their waste in front of their human owners, instead of in front of any one or any thing else?

Well a dog will shit in front of any thing...there is no preference I suppose. I used the human as example mainly because dogs usually have human owners present with them.

Or are you alluding to the fact that if and when a dog is on a lead, then it can NOT really excrete their waste anywhere else, other than in front of its "human" owner?

Yes.

By the way can dogs be "owned" by any thing else other than 'a human being'?

I'm not sure, I think they can be owned by other dogs? ...maybe? ..or maybe nothing owns them?

Now, as a human, would a human do the same thing and pull down it's trousers and dump it's load of shit on the pavement in front of every other person on that pavement?

Yes, some human beings would, and some DO.

Yes, they would do that, I totally agree with that. Most don't because of fear of ridicule.

Does a person feel self-conscious about doing such an activity ?

Some do, some do not.

I agree.

or would they do it without feeling any sense of self consciousness?

Again some would feel such a thing, while some would not.

Are you at all aware that NOT every one is the same?

Yes, I am aware that NOT every one is the same.

Or do they have to pretend they have self-consciousness?

If some do pretend, so what?

So what, is what they'll do, they will pretend.

My question was; WHY pretend?

My question was NOT about; WOULD people pretend? But WHY do they pretend, TO BE SOME THING WHICH THEY ARE NOT?

OF COURSE some human beings pretend. My question is in relation to WHY do they pretend? For example, WHY do you "dontaskme" PRETEND to be some thing which you are NOT?

Answer that properly and correctly, then you will KNOW WHY ALL adult human beings pretend.

The answer really is VERY simple and easy.

Why they pretend to have self-consciousness is because they believe they have consciousness? ...is that why?

By the way, the answer to YOUR question is; NO one HAS TO pretend that they have self-consciousness.

I agree Age...NO one HAS to pretend they have self-consciousness...I totally agree with you.

.

[Dontaskme]

Fear is important.

Is this from the nondual perspective or from the dual perspective?

From a dual perspective.

Even birds and mice fake their deaths, play dead out of fear at the thought of being eaten by a cat.

Do these things, which are just "illusions", as you call them, play 'illusionary' dead or play 'real', and/or 'really', dead? And, do they do either of these out of real fear or just illusionary fear?

Illusory fear.

If fear ends you die.

Who/what is a 'you', which could even die?

The one that believes it will die. But the instinct to survive in an animal is a progamme .. not a belief..I'm not sure.

How can an eternally NOW die?

It can't...death is a belief, a false held belief.

How could some thing, which is not even alive, nor dead, die?

It can in a fictional story believed....the believer is also the belief. But ultimately the story being a fiction means that nothing is living or dying.

Why?

The unconscious self knows no death, the conscious self knows death and it doesn't want to die, it is unconscious of there being no such state as death, but is conscious of impending death. The conscious state is knowing. The unconscious state is not-knowing, both knowing and not knowing are present in the same instant...else reality wouldn't work the way it does.

So, WHY is so called "fear" important?

What you said here, as far as I could tell, is TRYING TO explain MORE of WHY reality works the way it does instead of WHY "fear" is important.

Fear is important, because it's how life continues to live, life wants to live, to survive, fear is like a warning signal to survival to want to survive...even though there is nothing living and dying ultimately ...however consciousness wants to play the game of living and dying.

Also, if knowing fear AND not knowing fear are present in the same instant, then HOW and WHY is that supposedly 'important'?

Because you can't know one without the other, both concepts have to exist in the same instant.

Who/what would that knowing/not knowing "fear" actually be supposedly important to?

The one who fears.

The fear is innate in every living thing,

But I have NO fear.
For there is NO THING to fear, for Me.
And, I am living. (Or, if I have NO innate fear, then does that mean I am NOT living?)

So what is it that "you" "dontaskme" fear?

And WHY would you "fear" such things?

What is the WORST that could possibly happen to the "you"

I agree with all this too.

it's there by design, designed by infinite intelligence,

Is 'infinite intelligence' living?

If yes, then is fear innate in this living thing?
If no, (to the first question), then HOW can a NON living thing design some thing like fear?

Infinite intelligence is neither alive nor dead...the sense of fear is not arising to any thing, or owned by any thing. It's an automatic response in the instantaneous moment.

If fear is innate in EVERY living thing, and 'infinite intelligence' OBVIOUSLY was ALWAYS around, living, then what came first; having fear innately within It, or, It designing fear?

Both innate and design arise together now, as concepts known ..the concepts don't come first.

there has to be fear present and that's what keeps this whole dynamic of living ..living... and not being killed off in droves.

But there is only an infinite NOW, without ANY actual separation, (according to the nondual perspective), so WHAT could possibly be killed off, in droves, or even at all?

The story of death, the concept of it...ultimately nothing is being killed, for nothing is alive.

There is just far too much going on in life to explain it all...explaining everything would take an eternity to explain it all.

But I think a LOT, some times, can be explained in a VERY SHORT time. A LOT can be explained about a LOT of things in VERY FEW words, also.

Yes, I agree..but infinity expressed will go on indefinitely...and a lots of words will be manifest.

Saying, "There is just far to much going on in life to explain it all" some might SEE as just being an excuse, or a way out of TRYING, to NOT be questioned in regards to what they THINK they know.

Well only what is known can be known and written about ...so I guess only small amounts can be written at a time.

Everything is constantly changing, so as soon as something is explained, it changes dynamic, and a new explanation is needed.

Really? Are you absolutely SURE of this? Would a new explanation be needed by now? (Has YOUR explanation changed dynamically by the time you are reading this now?)

Could a now new explanation explain that although EVERY thing IS constantly-changing, explanations CAN some times last a "Life-time"? Like, for example; The explanation that; 'EVERY thing IS constantly-changing', last a 'long time'? This explanation, after all, could ONLY really change if, and only IF, EVERY thing STOPPED-changing. And, when do "we" think that is going to happen?

So, really JUST MAYBE when SOME things are explained a new explanation is REALLY NOT needed AT ALL. CAN some explanations actually last a Life-time?

When "you" "dontaskme" expressed that 'Everything is constantly changing', was that an explanation of the truth, or of a falsehood?

If it was the former, then WHEN will a "new" explanation of this BE NEEDED?

I'm not sure what you are saying here...but in my response...In knowing itself, the "knower" would be altered by the knowing.
The new knower would again have to change to accommodate the new knowing.On and on it would go.......never quite catching up.

.

[Age]

Surely there is NO SINGLE PATH to get anywhere.

Are you proposing this as an ABSOLUTE SURETY? Maybe, if you provide an example of one place where you think this statement might apply, then we can take a good hard LOOK AT it, and then discuss? What do you think about doing this? Where is one place, state, or anywhere else where you think/believe that there is NO SINGLE PATH to get to?

If you disagree, maybe you can provide an example of one place where you think this statement might NOT apply? Where is one place, state, or anywhere else where you think/believe that there is a SINGLE PATH to get to? Then we can take a good hard LOOK AT it.

If you "lacewing" want to claim some thing, but when asked to provide AN example regarding what you claim and you do NOT wish to provide any example, but instead prefer to put it all back on to me, then so be it.

But just to make it absolutely clear; I DO NOT DISAGREE. I was JUST ASKING YOU A CLARIFYING QUESTION.

But considering you will NOT put any example forward to LOOK AT, and then discuss it, then I WILL:

What about a place, or state, for human beings LIVING IN PEACE AND HARMONY with one another, here on earth?

Is there NO SINGLE PATH to get HERE?

I simply embrace being human on Earth while feeling that ALL IS WELL and complete. There is nothing I need to do or know... it's all play. This is why I don't think anyone needs to be telling me HOW to do it.

Telling you HOW to do WHAT exactly?

How to understand nonduality by following a certain path.

Ah okay. I did NOT know anyone was telling you HOW to understand nonduality by following a certain path.

Is there a certain, or particular, path to understanding ANY thing?

I KNOW of ONE WAY to understanding THY SELF and HOW to live in a Truly peaceful place with everyone, here on earth, BUT that certainly, in NO WAY at all, infers that there is one only ONE way or path. Although understanding nonduality is a Truly simple and easy thing to do, this UNDERSTANDING can be gained without ever even knowing the concept of nonduality yet. Some things are found and KNOWN without ever having to study any thing. I found that UNDERSTANDING absolutely any thing CAN BE gained in any number of multiple ways. But this could also be WRONG.

Why do you come across as though you think that "others" are continually telling you HOW to do "it" (some thing)? You, as an adult human being, are FREE to choose whatever you want to do, correct?

Don't worry, I don't feel pressured. My phrasing points to the way that people think they "know" a way to be/think/know that "others" should be/think/know, and so they tell those others how to be/think/know like they (themselves) do.

HOW do you KNOW what people are thinking, BEHIND what is just being expressed?

Like the way you continually urge people to communicate on your terms...

And, WHAT EXACTLY are "those" terms, which you think/believe are MY terms, which I supposedly continually urge people to communicate on?

the way you think they should...

What "way" EXACTLY do you think/believe that I think "others" should communicate on?

the way you think is the right way to do it.

I really would LOVE to SEE some EXAMPLES of WHERE you think/believe I am doing this.

Is this what I REALLY do? Or, just what you and "others" THINK and SAY I do?

Also, what is the "way" that you "think" that I "think" is the "right way" to do "it"?

Without examples then the only way to know what you are actually talking about is to guess/assume and I do NOT like to do either.

WHY can 'you' NOT just read/listen without thinking that another one is telling you how to do some thing.

WHY can 'you' NOT just read/listen without thinking that another one is doing something which they're actually not doing?

So, are you now saying that you actually do NOT think that some people are telling you how to understand nonduality by following a certain path?

Either you think that some people tell you how to do "some thing" or you do NOT think this. If it is the former, then you are actually DOING THIS. But if you are NOT actually doing this, then you are contradicting what you have previously written, which is the very reason WHY I THOUGHT that you were actually doing some thing, which is thinking that others are telling you how to do some thing by following a certain path.

If, however, you are now saying that you actual do NOT "do this/think this", then so be it. But your previous words SHOW otherwise.

Whenever I have expressed what I have done, or what I have SEEN from what I did, you come in as though I am telling you HOW to do some thing, which is so far from the Truth. This is WHY I continually ask to clarify WHERE are you getting this perception FROM exactly.

Maybe you can provide some links or examples to where you think this occurred?

From when we first started discussing, when my writings were under the username "ken", here in this forum, (I will go look back now), to right up to this very post of yours where you say; "tell those others how to be/think/know like they (themselves) do", and then go on to say; "Like the way you continually urge people to communicate on your terms....". That is WHERE this occurred. The 'you' word IS in reference to 'me' and HOW I "tell others" how to do some thing. Now, honestly this is NOT in direct reference to you here, but if you honestly BELIEVE that I do NOT tell you how to do some thing, then great. If you just clarify that for us, then that would be good.

No need for links or examples now anyway. I found the answer I was LOOKING FOR in your writings there.

You get this perception that I, and "others", are telling you 'HOW to do some thing by following a certain path', FROM WHEN you "spent many years and much energy exploring various paths of enlightenment." And during that time, you "believed that "other people needed to know such things too". So, this is WHERE you are getting this perception FROM.

Your OWN past experiences are leading you astray. You are making ASSUMPTIONS, based on your own past experiences, and those memories of what you, yourself, used to do. That is; you BELIEVED that because you "found a path of enlightenment" then "others" needed to know such things also". And so now you project that, what you actually DID, onto what you see/think/assume I, and "others", do also. Which by the way is NOT what I do. I am NOT 'you' and I am NOT doing, what you, yourself, used to do.

I KNEW that your perception that I am doing some thing, which I am NOT, came FROM your past experiences, but FROM which past experience EXACTLY that you had I was NOT sure of. That is WHY the clarifying questions. But your own words have explained it better than I ever could. Although I already knew the answer, your own words provides much stronger evidence, then I ever could.

Where/when were you expressing about yourself, and I thought that you were telling me how to do something?

I can NOT recall the exact conversation/s now, but I do recall on a few occasions you mentioned how there is NOT one path, and I would say that I am NOT saying that there is one path only. But you would write in a way that inferred that that is what I was saying and what I was TELLING you is the way.

You may not have been doing this consciously, but this is what I saw you were doing, and it is good to now see WHERE you get this perception FROM exactly.

Maybe we will see that you were making inaccurate assumptions/assessments about the person you were talking to, or comparing what you do (as right) with what another does (as wrong).

I am NOT sure why you are adding the 'right' and 'wrong' words here now, as they have NEVER had anything to do with what I was just wanting to clarify from you, which WAS; You APPEAR to think that I am telling you HOW to do some thing, and I wanted to KNOW WHERE this perception was coming from. Thankfully, the actual REASON WHY you do this, quite often, has already been explained. So, my inquisitiveness is satisfied now.

Is it POSSIBLE that some one could POSSIBLY SHOW you a way to a Truly loving and peaceful world in which absolutely EVERY one is living in harmony, with one "another", as One?

Sure. Do you think it is necessary?

If you want to be Truly happy in peace and harmony with EVERY one, then yes it is necessary. But if you are Truly happy in peace and harmony, right now, then no it is NOT necessary.

Is there something not in complete order right now?

The wars, the pollution, the abuse, the greed, the killing, fighting, disputing, debating, disagreeing, nagging, whinging, whining, warring, the harming, the damaging, the destruction, the tension, the stress, the worrying, the despair, the constant concerns, the judging, the mis-judging, the put downs, the ridiculing, the emotional abuse, the physical abuse, the mental abuse, the spiritual abuse, the sickness, the depression, the suicides, the unnecessary dying, the starving, and then ALL the things used to overcome these things like, the drugs, the money, the sex, the power, the control, the over eating, the gambling, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, are just SOME of the things that are NOT in complete order right now.

This is what I observe anyway. 'you', however, may see things differently.

You may feel that ALL IS WELL and complete, but this is certainly NOT my VIEW, nor how i feel at all.

[Logik]

Just to be clear, I am here in this forum to learn how to communicate BETTER. NOT just to learn how to communicate.

How can LEARNING even be factually challenged?

Either I am learning some thing or I am not. End of story.

Because if you were becoming BETTER at communication we would notice.

There's no improvement.

HOW would you KNOW what I am learning, and/or NOT learning?

Because there's no improvement in your communication skills.

I am NOT in this forum to communicate any thing with any one here. I am in this forum to LEARN; HOW TO COMMUNICATE BETTER.

If you have learned anything - you are not applying it.

etc. etc. etc.

You aren't learning. You are repeating the same behaviour over and over.

[Lacewing]

We are never, ever, never, ever, going to understand each other

The fact that you believe you can't agree with another person simply speaks to your lack of rationality.

I understand non-dualism just fine. You are a dualist desperately trying to feign nondualism.

Well said, Logik!

I do understand what DAM is saying and (like you -- although you do it better) I try to point out the inconsistencies (and apparent self-deception).

Her response usually seems to be to increase her spin -- as if to spin a web around herself and those who challenge her -- accelerating faster and faster into crazyland. She does seem to prefer her own echo chamber and self-absorbed spin. I question why she wants to do it on a stage (as I've questioned others who've done similarly before her). Seems kind of destructive to do it on a public forum that disassembles such things. But on the chance that it's a cry for help, I'm just answering.

[Lacewing]

Surely there is NO SINGLE PATH to get anywhere.

Are you proposing this as an ABSOLUTE SURETY?

I didn't think or say anything about some kind of "absolute surety". I'm simply expressing my perspective that a Universe of seemingly endless possibilities and manifestations does not seem limited to single paths for anything.

Do you disagree? Please explain why. Do you think there is a single path? If so, please explain what it is.

You may feel that ALL IS WELL and complete, but this is certainly NOT my VIEW, nor how i feel at all.

Do you think your view and how you feel are representative of ultimate truth that applies to all?

[Dontaskme]

Dontaskme wrote:
We are never, ever, never, ever, going to understand each other

Logik wroteThe fact that you believe you can't agree with another person simply speaks to your lack of rationality.

Mutual understanding of nonduality is not the same as the desire to agree with each other, a mutual understanding of nonduality needs no agreement or disagreement. Mutual understanding is self standing. It's not in opposition with itself.
I hope I've made myself clear. That which is self standing needs no external support. And yes, that seems irrational to the mind of logic. But reality is irrational like that, you need to accept it.

Logik wrote I understand non-dualism just fine. You are a dualist desperately trying to feign nondualism.

If you undertand nonduality just fine you would already know that to claim the following statement... ''You are a dualist desperately trying to feign nondualism'' is nothing more than a fictional lie...for there is no one that can feign nondualism..that's a claim made,but nonduality makes no claim of anything of the sort..the fictional belief is an appearance of it, not it...You'd know this already if you understood nonduality, but you clearly don't.

The truth is you have actually no understanding of nonduality at all. And neither does Lacewing. And that is why you both struggle to hear it.
You then both attack the messenger instead of listening to the message and discerning from the message what is actually being spoken and learn from that knowledge.
You both have no doubt heard about nonduality, and the fact is that nonduality is what you are right now, it is living you right now, you are being it right now with no story attached.
But to put nonduality into words is another story, it's an imagined fictional belief...superimposed upon it, already couched within it, but not it.

There is knowing and there is knowing the source of that knowing, if the knowing comes from the individual I ..then that is duality, it's a false premise, but if the knowing is coming from the infinite I then that knowing is the correct understanding. I hope I've made myself clear.

I'm just not going to waste my energy in playing the part of the get-a-long-gang-game. I prefer to walk alone. I do however, want to talk about that aloneness that is nondual reality...there is a huge difference between wanting approval and not wanting it because one is already self knowing.

The game that is to agree to disagree mentality is not my game anymore, my game is mutual understanding ..agreeing which side of the fence you want to sit is just mind interpretation, aka belief. I'm not interested in that, I'm interested in direct mutual understanding of the self.

True understanding is going beyond belief to reach the self shining clarity that is within all of us right now. We are that clarity when understanding is mutual.

Belief about who is right or wrong, agreeing or disagreeing with each other has nothing to do with nonduality. Nonduality is about mutual understanding.

If you both understand nonduality then start putting it into words...then perhaps we can understand each other, until you do that, then how can we understand each other?

And don't come back with phrases like ''the tao that can be spoken of is not the true tao''...that's true, but at the same time it can be put into words, because that is the next paradigm shift that is taking place on the planet right now...so start talking the truth, if you can't then I'm not interested.
I'm only interested in truths.

The truth can be spoken about and it will paradoxically be a fictional belief, but that fictional belief is the only tool available that can point back to the true original self, the self that has no story to tell...for it is unwritten. Unborn.

.

.

[Dontaskme]

I do understand what DAM is saying and (like you -- although you do it better) I try to point out the inconsistencies (and apparent self-deception).

Her response usually seems to be to increase her spin -- as if to spin a web around herself and those who challenge her -- accelerating faster and faster into crazyland. She does seem to prefer her own echo chamber and self-absorbed spin. I question why she wants to do it on a stage (as I've questioned others who've done similarly before her). Seems kind of destructive to do it on a public forum that disassembles such things. But on the chance that it's a cry for help, I'm just answering.

Good, I'm happy to hear you understand what DAM is saying.

Now, the problem is, I don't understand what you are saying, so I would like you to explain yourself to me in precise detail exactly what you are saying, and do it point by point, covering all the claims you have made above so that I understand them too. Because this one here has absolutely no idea what you are saying. But would like to understand every point you are making perfectly. If you can understand what you have said, then you can teach me to understand what you understand. I can then learn from you so that I too will understand you see?...I too want to understand exactly what you have claimed here about me...because I'm not seeing what you are seeing from my perspective...so you'll have to show me what you are seeing by explaining it all perfectly so that I get it...I await your carefully examined response. Please try not to overwhelm my capacity to understand, treat me like a young toddler just starting out at school, don't overwhelm me with too much information at once...can you manage that?

If you do not explain it to me, then all I'm hearing is a barking dog going woof woof woof...please continue...I'm going to give you another chance, because I'm kind and generous like that, but please show some respect if it's in you because I will just respond in the way I am treated...because that is the nature of the ego.

Do continue..but do it in a way that what makes sense to you will also make sense to me... so then we will both develop a mutual understanding of each others nondual musings..note, that I only ever talk in nondual context, which you have already claimed to understand.

Go ahead...lets try and reach a mutal understanding of ourself.



_______________
Disclaimer: there is no claimer.

[Dontaskme]

Just to be clear, I am here in this forum to learn how to communicate BETTER. NOT just to learn how to communicate.

How can LEARNING even be factually challenged?

Either I am learning some thing or I am not. End of story.

Because if you were becoming BETTER at communication we would notice.

I don't know about the ''we''

But I notice.

It took me a while to notice what modal technique Age uses to communicate , but then I persevered continuously listening and reading his posts, I wanted to understand this person, then something just clicked with me and I changed my mind about this person's way of communicating. I see something very valid and genuine there worth listening to and communicating with. I actually think Age is an Excellent communicator. One would have to be blind not to notice that. I noticed, and I appreciated.
The presention is always faultless, punctuation and grammar flawless, and beautifully and eloquently presented, and as clear and straight on point as anything you will ever read.

Unlike the mishmash mess that is my writing...but that's something I have to improve on, and most of the time I'm being lazy with presentation, not that I'm talking nonsense, just that my presentation is sloppy, I admit that ..I don't see that in Age's writings.

And lets just be clear on one thing, we are always improving all the time, everyday we are a changed person, none of us live totally static lives, we are always under construction. We are each others teachers and students both.

This forum is very lucky to have Age. Because Age is about unity and harmony within the human species which is very positive and desperately needed in a world full of conflicting egos...in my humble opinion, anything that ego attempts to do in the world is doomed to fail.

When people are learning new knowledge that knowledge has to be repeated over and over again until it's processed and understood, just like the technique used by teachers of small children learning about the world they have been born into that they have no knowledge of their own of.
They have to have stuff repeated to them until they get it..it's the same with adult children.

You aren't learning. You are repeating the same behaviour over and over.

Oh really?

All behavior is learnt behavior ...learning is what we do...we repeat what we do until we learn it, and then move on to more learning.

.

[Lacewing]

Now, the problem is, I don't understand what you are saying...

Oh, I think you do.

Because this one here has absolutely no idea what you are saying... /... I await your carefully examined response

That one there plays games. Who/what are you really waiting for?

If you do not explain it to me, then all I'm hearing is a barking dog going woof woof woof...

That is the sound of your own manic noise when no one comes to feed you.

please show some respect if it's in you because I will just respond in the way I am treated...because that is the nature of the ego.

Well, that is not true now either, is it? You are fully capable of showing NO respect, all on your own, just because it suits you in the moment. So how about stepping out of your bullshit long enough to be honest and take responsibility for your crap? Also, are you not aware of how much distortion your ego can cause?

I only ever talk in nondual context

Trying to twist things to suit yourself again? Which suits you better: being delusional or dishonest? Are you aware when you do it, or is it so ingrained you don't even see it anymore nor care because you've conveniently decided that there is no one else to care about?

[Dontaskme]

Now, the problem is, I don't understand what you are saying...

Oh, I think you do.

Because this one here has absolutely no idea what you are saying... /... I await your carefully examined response

That one there plays games. Who/what are you really waiting for?

If you do not explain it to me, then all I'm hearing is a barking dog going woof woof woof...

That is the sound of your own manic noise when no one comes to feed you.

please show some respect if it's in you because I will just respond in the way I am treated...because that is the nature of the ego.

Well, that is not true now either, is it? You are fully capable of showing NO respect, all on your own, just because it suits you in the moment. So how about stepping out of your bullshit long enough to be honest and take responsibility for your crap? Also, are you not aware of how much distortion your ego can cause?

I only ever talk in nondual context

Trying to twist things to suit yourself again? Which suits you better: being delusional or dishonest? Are you aware when you do it, or is it so ingrained you don't even see it anymore nor care because you've conveniently decided that there is no one else to care about?

Typical same old conditioned reactive response that fails to address any of the issues I requested you to address. What did you mean by saying ''...a cry for help? ...'' what was that supposed to mean...and was it necessary? ...why the need to make everything personal?

You have not explained what I asked you to explain..so all I can say to you is that you do not even understand what you yourself are talking about. I have no idea what this statement ''cry for help'' is meant to imply...only you know that..do you even know what you are talking about? ..if so, clarify what you meant to me out of respect, if you are into respectful communication, then what did you mean by making that statement..it's not that I care what you say about me, because I already know my own sanity, I'm just curious as to where that statement is coming from if not a projection of your own insecurity?...Also there are never any counter claims of your own against what I am talking about, no substance or attempt to reach any mutual undertsanding...you say you want to challenge me, and I agreed, saying go ahead, but so far nothing has manifested in you, just the same old knee jerk typical reactive jabs back at me again.. reacting with more negativity toward the messenger instead of attacking the message.
Respect is earned not a given..I tried to show respect and kindness to you because I do care.. but all I got back was more negativity that there is something wrong with my reasoning. I'm trying to reach a point where we can discuss openly and honestly, but you prefer to shut me down each time...and so then I do the same thing back...so how long we going to keep doing that to each other..it takes two to tango, it's not always one sided.

I can only communicate in a nondual context. I'm openly honest about that..saying I'm twisting things to suit me is disrespectful and expecting me to do what I cannot do is also disrespectful...if you understood nonduality like I do then we would both be able to communicate on the same wave length. If you insist on challenging everything I say, then you have to address not only what I am saying to you, but what you are saying to me so that we at least undrstand each other...so far we have both failed in that respect.

So if you have anything to challenge then please continue...but can you keep the personal person out of this...and deal with the message.

In nonduality, there is a character with an identity, but it's a fiction, if you understood nonduality you would agree with that. So lets not throw stones at the puppet, the puppets have feeling as well, it's all part of the illusion...so don't attack the puppet, attack the message...can you manage that?

Are you incapable to discuss with other posters without resorting to personal attack...I know I'm not perfect myself, but I am willing and learning to improve on that every day..are you?



.

[Lacewing]

Are you incapable to discuss with other posters without resorting to personal attack...I know I'm not perfect myself, but I am willing and learning to improve on that every day..are you?

I have demonstrated many times that I am capable of having respectful conversations with people. When someone starts acting like an ass though, and is dishonest about what they say, and is denying what they do, I challenge why they are doing that, and if they are aware of doing that.

When you've called me a deaf, dumb, and blind idiot -- it's so absurd and childish, I know you're just freaking out in the moment.

Yes, many times I have challenged the things you've said. You yourself have said a few times that it's all bullshit, and you've said something to the effect of being insane and knowing nothing. Those seemed like some of your most brilliant and honest statements. Then you slip back into claiming all that you do, spinning and ignoring, and taking it more seriously than you want to admit. Telling everyone "how it is" with a tone of authority/knowing that trumps their view.

My comment about "if it's a cry for help, I'm just answering" was about the intoxicated spin you might get into (that any of us can get into), and we need someone to throw cold water in our face. We might ACT like we don't need anyone, yet our "crazy" will ramp up to absurd levels as if we are testing to see if anyone will respond and stick with us.

You do not set a good example of respectful discourse...so when you implore me to do so, it's laughable. You have lots of statements you throw back in people's faces... about looking in the mirror, or realizing that there's no one there, or it's another you, etc. It's rude and dismissive... and, as I've said, even dishonest... because you often do not honor/acknowledge what matters to other people, yet you'll honor/acknowledge those things when they happen to you. I've told you this before. There is a lot of ego involved, even if it is denied.

Earlier this week I stepped forward to have a respectful conversation with you (at your request), and you unleashed your crazy on me. So there's no reason for me to take your request seriously again. It is not my desire to hurt you in any way. If I think you're plopping piles of crap around... I may point them out and ask why... which I think is very reasonable.