Göbekli Tepe

[Atla]

I will repeat;
All I have done is just ask you HOW and WHY you say the "first humans" were only 12,000 years ago?

What you wrote was;
What went on in the minds of the first humans, 12000 years ago?

So, you are WRONG, in that I do know what you wrote. This is obviously true as evidenced by my very simple open clarifying question posed to you. But, you are RIGHT, in that I am 100% clueless about why you will not clarify this to me. Will you now, at least, clarify WHY you will not answer and clarify my questions?

How I meant it should be fairly obvious.

Well obviously it was NOT obvious, to me.

So when you say "the first humans were around 12,000 years ago" and that is NOT what you meant, then what did you actually mean?

It is still very far from obvious, well to me anyway.

I have also not seen anyone else explain to me what you"obviously" meant.

I am open to anyone explaing to me what you "obviously" meant.

And why should this topic be about your unending comprehension issues, instead of Göbekli Tepe?

[Age]

Age... knows nothing.

Hence when discussing with him one must "sip coffee"....(sipping coffee)

I will let your own words (bolder) speak for themselves about how much you really know and do not know

I assume void...you claim to know the truth.

And that truth is 'you assume every thing'.

Either I know this is truth, or are you saying that this is not the truth?

See, I can know the truth, whereas you can never know any thing; as you assume every thing.

[Atla]

Tell me why I should waste even more time trying to explain stuff to you that I understood 20 years ago? I'm looking for people who can challenge me philosophically, insights I haven't thought of.

Given you appear to not know that there's been two thousand years of discussion about your 'nondualism' I'm guessing your twenty years have not involved much critique of your thoughts?

No there hasn't been, Western nondualism is deep down dualistic. Which I already told you.

[Eodnhoj7]

I will let your own words (bolder) speak for themselves about how much you really know and do not know

I assume void...you claim to know the truth.

And that truth is 'you assume every thing'.

Either I know this is truth, or are you saying that this is not the truth?

See, I can know the truth, whereas you can never know any thing; as you assume every thing.

I assumed void and this is an assumption leading to a further assumption that assumes the original assumption as an empty form that is assumed "as is" and is assumed as a way of assuming because of "as is".

I know nothing as knowing is empty.

So you know the truth...do tell.

[Atla]

It is not your fault that 'you' adult human beings do not listen now, and instead assume and guess. This is ALL my fault because I created things to be exactly this way, for a very specific reason and purpose I might add. I meant for things to be exactly how they are HERE-NOW.

What is the very specific reason and purpose?

When this is written most human beings are still wondering what is right and what is wrong in Life. The very specific reason and purpose for this is because individually and collectively human beings learn best from their mistakes. A child can not just learn what is right from being told what is right. They HAVE to experience it. For example, you can tell a child that the stove or the fire is hot, but they will not "listen" to that 'what is right's advice. They, literally, have to experience it, for them selves, to accept it AND learn it. They learn by their mistakes. The more an individual experiences the more they can and will learn. The more wrong or mistakes human beings do and make collectively, then the more they can and will learn.

Also, not until later in life, and/or closer to one's own death bed, do human beings individually start to really contemplate and consider 'what is this (Life) all about?' and 'how they could have done things differently/better'. This will also happen when human beings collectively get older in age and/or are closer to their death bed. When human beings discover what it is that is Truly right and wrong in Life, then they will learn and see WHY it was so important that they had a percentage of 'free will' to be able to learn and discover for, and by, their own selves, without necessarily being told 'what is right' by "others".

The Truth is the True and Right Answers are within every one anyway, and, if left alone, and given enough time, they will find and discover these Answers by, and for, themselves.

No dipshit, you are just making this whole thing up, in order to get one-up on other people. It's a form of malignance.

[Age]

How I meant it should be fairly obvious.

Well obviously it was NOT obvious, to me.

So when you say "the first humans were around 12,000 years ago" and that is NOT what you meant, then what did you actually mean?

It is still very far from obvious, well to me anyway.

I have also not seen anyone else explain to me what you"obviously" meant.

I am open to anyone explaing to me what you "obviously" meant.

And why should this topic be about your unending comprehension issues, instead of Göbekli Tepe?

I always find it humorous that when I ask a simple clarifying question in regards to what was actually said, then I am accused of being off topic, but there can be pages and pages of writings, which are obviously off topic, but which I did not participate in.

If you read the last few or so pages, of which you contributed to profusely, then maybe you could answer your own question here.

The reason this is about "unending comprehension issues", to me, is because if you just clarified the first time, then this would have been over and done with pages ago.

You do NOT clarify what you claim, which is obviously wrong to me. Therefore, it is your lack of ability to clarify, WHY there is an unending comprehension issue with me. Surely even this would be obvious to any one here.

You even say I do not know why you will not clarify. So, I then ask you, why do you not clarify, and even then you do NOT answer this simple clarifying question.

Can you now see WHY this is never ending?

[Arising_uk]

No there hasn't been, Western nondualism is deep down dualistic. Which I already told you.

So what makes your 'nondualism' different from Thales's or Anaximander's or Anaximenes's or Heraclitus's or Parmenides's or Leibniz's or Berkeley's or Hegel's or Hobbes's or Russell's or Spinoza's or any of the Hindu ones?

[Atla]

Well obviously it was NOT obvious, to me.

So when you say "the first humans were around 12,000 years ago" and that is NOT what you meant, then what did you actually mean?

It is still very far from obvious, well to me anyway.

I have also not seen anyone else explain to me what you"obviously" meant.

I am open to anyone explaing to me what you "obviously" meant.

And why should this topic be about your unending comprehension issues, instead of Göbekli Tepe?

I always find it humorous that when I ask a simple clarifying question in regards to what was actually said, then I am accused of being off topic, but there can be pages and pages of writings, which are obviously off topic, but which I did not participate in.

If you read the last few or so pages, of which you contributed to profusely, then maybe you could answer your own question here.

The reason this is about "unending comprehension issues", to me, is because if you just clarified the first time, then this would have been over and done with pages ago.

You do NOT clarify what you claim, which is obviously wrong to me. Therefore, it is your lack of ability to clarify, WHY there is an unending comprehension issue with me. Surely even this would be obvious to any one here.

You even say I do not know why you will not clarify. So, I then ask you, why do you not clarify, and even then you do NOT answer this simple clarifying question.

Can you now see WHY this is never ending?

Stop lying, if I clarify a word to you, you reply with 3 more misunderstandings. It's like an exponential curve.

[Lacewing]

I created things to be exactly this way, for a very specific reason and purpose I might add.

What is the very specific reason and purpose?

The very specific reason and purpose for this is because individually and collectively human beings learn best from their mistakes.

Why create human beings who need to learn from mistakes in such a way? Why not instill them with more awareness?

Once I can explain HOW and WHY it is I who creates ALL of this destruction going on, and not just some of it, and I am fully heard and understood, then the destruction I am continually causing can be and will be STOPPED.

Why are you incapable of explaining -- and/or why not create humans with the ability to hear and understand?

This sounds like you just want people to keep listening to you as if there's a good reason to, such as: the salvation of man. Your claims and excuses are lame.

I meant for things to be exactly how they are HERE-NOW.

So was this all you were capable of? You keep talking about people fully hearing and understanding, as if what you meant things to be HERE-NOW is for there to be an inability of stopping all the destruction.

Are you playing twisted games? Why create humans that must learn -- so that you can revel in some kind of superiority, rather than acknowledging that you're a terrible creator?

The Truth is the True and Right Answers are within every one anyway, and, if left alone, and given enough time, they will find and discover these Answers by, and for, themselves.

Why must they go through a process? What's the point of that if the answers are within them already?

And why are you here telling them about their inability, if you're the one who created that inability? Seriously, what kind of twisted, fucked up trip are you on?

[Age]

I assume void...you claim to know the truth.

And that truth is 'you assume every thing'.

Either I know this is truth, or are you saying that this is not the truth?

See, I can know the truth, whereas you can never know any thing; as you assume every thing.

I assumed void and this is an assumption leading to a further assumption that assumes the original assumption as an empty form that is assumed "as is" and is assumed as a way of assuming because of "as is".

I know nothing as knowing is empty.

So you know the truth...do tell.

I find it hilarious that you once again MISSED it here. I could in a sense understand how and why you missed my given example in your thread on this issue, but I wrote the exact same example here now but never would have even thought that you could miss it again.

I told you the truth that I know in the quote of mine that you, yourself, just provided, and just responded to.

[Atla]

No there hasn't been, Western nondualism is deep down dualistic. Which I already told you.

So what makes your 'nondualism' different from Thales's or Anaximander's or Anaximenes's or Heraclitus's or Parmenides's or Leibniz's or Berkeley's or Hegel's or Hobbes's or Russell's or Spinoza's or any of the Hindu ones?

some Hindu ones

Well do your own research (but nondual thinking can be difficult to grasp so..)

[Skepdick]

So what makes your 'nondualism' different from Thales's or Anaximander's or Anaximenes's or Heraclitus's or Parmenides's or Leibniz's or Berkeley's or Hegel's or Hobbes's or Russell's or Spinoza's or any of the Hindu ones?

Nothing. It's the same as apophatic teleology and via negativa.

That's why it's called "non-dualism", because if you SAY "monism" you contradict yourself.

You reject duality and you don't give it a name, you avoid the root-cause of dualism. The signifier <-> signified duality. Labels.

[Age]

What is the very specific reason and purpose?

When this is written most human beings are still wondering what is right and what is wrong in Life. The very specific reason and purpose for this is because individually and collectively human beings learn best from their mistakes. A child can not just learn what is right from being told what is right. They HAVE to experience it. For example, you can tell a child that the stove or the fire is hot, but they will not "listen" to that 'what is right's advice. They, literally, have to experience it, for them selves, to accept it AND learn it. They learn by their mistakes. The more an individual experiences the more they can and will learn. The more wrong or mistakes human beings do and make collectively, then the more they can and will learn.

Also, not until later in life, and/or closer to one's own death bed, do human beings individually start to really contemplate and consider 'what is this (Life) all about?' and 'how they could have done things differently/better'. This will also happen when human beings collectively get older in age and/or are closer to their death bed. When human beings discover what it is that is Truly right and wrong in Life, then they will learn and see WHY it was so important that they had a percentage of 'free will' to be able to learn and discover for, and by, their own selves, without necessarily being told 'what is right' by "others".

The Truth is the True and Right Answers are within every one anyway, and, if left alone, and given enough time, they will find and discover these Answers by, and for, themselves.

No dipshit, you are just making this whole thing up, in order to get one-up on other people. It's a form of malignance.

What are you saying "No" to exactly?

And, what am I supposedly "making up"?

I how NO intention of getting "one-up on other people". I do not even know what it means or in what context you are even talking about. (I would normally ask a clarifying question or two now, but you have shown a complete inability to answer them.)

What exactly is a form of malignancy?

[Age]

And why should this topic be about your unending comprehension issues, instead of Göbekli Tepe?

I always find it humorous that when I ask a simple clarifying question in regards to what was actually said, then I am accused of being off topic, but there can be pages and pages of writings, which are obviously off topic, but which I did not participate in.

If you read the last few or so pages, of which you contributed to profusely, then maybe you could answer your own question here.

The reason this is about "unending comprehension issues", to me, is because if you just clarified the first time, then this would have been over and done with pages ago.

You do NOT clarify what you claim, which is obviously wrong to me. Therefore, it is your lack of ability to clarify, WHY there is an unending comprehension issue with me. Surely even this would be obvious to any one here.

You even say I do not know why you will not clarify. So, I then ask you, why do you not clarify, and even then you do NOT answer this simple clarifying question.

Can you now see WHY this is never ending?

Stop lying, if I clarify a word to you, you reply with 3 more misunderstandings. It's like an exponential curve.

If you BELIEVE that, then it MUST BE true.

Do you have examples that prove I am lying?

If you can not clarify what the "first humans, 12,000 years ago" means (or does not mean), then so be it.

[Arising_uk]

some Hindu ones

Well do your own research (but nondual thinking can be difficult to grasp so..)

"nondual thinking". I think you might need to do a bit more thinking about this.

So you're a Hindu based 'non-dualist', as such you fall under spiritual monism but what type, substantial, attributive or an absolute monist?