All is energy / God is energy

[Age]

Bullshit. Not knowing everything there is to know about something doesn't automatically equate to 'knowing nothing' you fucking moron.

WHO are you replying here to EXACTLY?

I NEVER even 'thought' ANY thing like this, let alone 'mentioned' NOR 'said' absolutely ANY thing like this.

Obviously some people have a greater level of understanding and the means to increase their understanding than others, after having spent years studying it.

OF COURSE SOME DO.

'you', human beings, can so-call 'study' absolutely ANY thing, for as long as 'you' like, like, for example, the Universe, Itself, BUT when the so-called "experts" of the 'study' can NOT even agree on what some words ACTUALLY MEAN or REFER TO, EXACTLY, then 'spending years' so-called 'studying' could end up have being for absolutely nothing more than just a complete 'waste of time'. That is; IF the so-called "experts" EVER get around on DECIDING and AGREEING UPON on what 'time', itself, ACTUALLY IS, EXACTLY, for example.

Why do you have this obsessive need to argue about EVERYTHING??

LOL

I was NOT 'arguing' ANY thing.

I JUST asked 'you' an OPEN and SIMPLE question in regards HOW, or WHY, would 'you' expect to 'get your head around' some 'thing', when the so-called "experts" have NOT YET even WORKED OUT HOW to just DEFINE that 'thing', let alone got 'their heads around that 'thing'.

A question ASKED is NOT necessarily 'an argument' AT ALL.

AND, my next two comments were NOT 'arguments' AT ALL, either, and, in fact, were JUST Facts that could NOT be REFUTED.

Now, I could say, 'Why do you have this obsessive need to blow EVERYTHING out of proportion??'

But, that would be just as ABSURD and as UNTRUTHFUL as what 'you' asked me here and CLAIMED was true.

So I will NOT. But, I WILL ask, WHY do 'you' MISCONSTRUE and TAKE OUT OF CONTEXT SO MUCH as 'you' DO in what I SAY and WRITE here?

My comment was to her, not you, so kindly butt your big, fat, hairy, contrary snout out of it unless you have something constructive and intelligent to say.

My question WAS TO 'you', "vegetariantaxidermy", personally. And, my two comments WERE to 'you', and "others".

So, kindly refrain from TELLING 'me' what TO DO or what NOT TO DO.

If 'you' were, and still ARE, just completely and utterly INCAPABLE to just answer a Truly OPEN and SIMPLE question, asked and posed for CLARITY, alone, then so be it.

But I WILL ask questions and make comments in a PUBLIC FORUM if, and when, I CHOOSE TO DO SO. I WILL make AS MANY as I like AS WELL.

Is this UNDERSTOOD by 'you'?

And, JUST MAYBE if 'you' read what I ACTUALLY WROTE, AGAIN, BEFORE 'you' JUMP to making ANY ASSUMPTIONS AT ALL, based on the very first three letters I USED, then JUST MAYBE 'you' WILL SEE 'things' completely DIFFERENTLY, this time.

I suppose you are an early bot. Obsolete now and too moronic and obvious to be of any use.

If you say so, but this still does NOT detract away from the fact that 'you 'will' NEVER 'get 'your' head around all of this' while the so-called "experts" can NOT even agree on the terms and names used to explain ALL of 'this'.

[Flannel Jesus]

If you say so, but this still does NOT detract away from the fact that 'you 'will' NEVER 'get 'your' head around all of this' while the so-called "experts" can NOT even agree on the terms and names used to explain ALL of 'this'.

You're getting sloppy with your nonsensical and useless quoting. Let's count the single quotes, starting with the one before 'you':

1, 'you, which is unclosed immediately -- unusual for you, interesting choice.
2,3, 'will'
4, 'get, another rare quote that isn't immediately closed.
5,6, 'your'
7, this' -- this quote is closing either the quote that started with 'you, or the quote that started with 'get

An odd number; you've left an unclosed quote. Even if you hadn't have flubbed it, I don't know that they would have added any meaning to what you're saying.

I mean really, just look at this:

If you say so, but this still does NOT detract away from the fact that you will NEVER get your head around all of this while the so-called "experts" can NOT even agree on the terms and names used to explain ALL of this.

What's missing in this that is added by all the quotes? Ya goof.

[Age]

If you say so, but this still does NOT detract away from the fact that 'you 'will' NEVER 'get 'your' head around all of this' while the so-called "experts" can NOT even agree on the terms and names used to explain ALL of 'this'.

You're getting sloppy with your nonsensical and useless quoting.

If that is what 'you' SEE and BELIEVE, then that is what 'it' IS, EXACTLY, correct?

Let's count the single quotes, starting with the one before 'you':

1, 'you, which is unclosed immediately -- unusual for you, interesting choice.
2,3, 'will'
4, 'get, another rare quote that isn't immediately closed.
5,6, 'your'
7, this' -- this quote is closing either the quote that started with 'you, or the quote that started with 'get

An odd number; you've left an unclosed quote. Even if you hadn't have flubbed it, I don't know that they would have added any meaning to what you're saying.

AND 'you' WILL NEVER KNOW. BECAUSE 'you' are NOT even SEEKING TO KNOW, and thus MEANING that 'you' are NOT even REALLY WANTING 'TO KNOW'.

I mean really, just look at this:

Okay, lets.

If you say so, but this still does NOT detract away from the fact that you will NEVER get your head around all of this while the so-called "experts" can NOT even agree on the terms and names used to explain ALL of this.

What's missing in this that is added by all the quotes?

WHAT IS MISSING IS MY ACTUAL MEANING. Which, as 'you' PROVING here, AGAIN, 'you' WILL NEVER COME TO KNOW due to those BELIEFS and ASSUMPTIONS, which 'you' CLEARLY HAVE and are HOLDING ONTO here.

Ya goof.

As can be CLEARLY SEEN here, her we have ANOTHER one who does NOT question NOR challenge the ACTUAL WORDS being USED by I, but picks up on the WAY I write ONLY.

So, who AND what is the REAL so-called 'goof' here.

[Flannel Jesus]

WHAT IS MISSING IS MY ACTUAL MEANING.

That's not true. There's not an ounce of meaning missing from my quoteless rendition of your words.

If there is, articulate it please. I'm real curious what meaning was missed.

[Age]

WHAT IS MISSING IS MY ACTUAL MEANING.

That's not true. There's not an ounce of meaning missing from my quoteless rendition of your words.

I REALLY wish 'you', posters', here would ACTUALLY READ, and SEE, thee ACTUAL WORDS that I SAY, WRITE, and USE here, AND, COMPREHEND them.

I NEVER said, NOR even MENTIONED what 'you' are TALKING ABOUT here.

If there is, articulate it please. I'm real curious what meaning was missed.

MY MEANING. OR, in other words, what I MEAN, MEANT, and AM MEANING, WAS and IS being MISSED here.

HOPEFULLY, 'you' COMPREHEND and UNDERSTAND, 'this', THIS TIME.

[Flannel Jesus]

What are you talking about?

[Dontaskme]

Then, out of frustration, the thinking mind cannot help saying “I don’t know” and finally quits.

Probably for most people, this would sound terrifying and depressing. And the language of non-dualism often sounds like babble. I prefer the slightly gentler approach of 'Forget everything you've been told about what life is and how it works'.

Liberation from the illusory sense of individual 'self'


There is no consciousness after death (of individuality), since Consciousness alone is the entirety of being, there is no consciousness of anything objective in the highest state. It is the fullness of perfect existence.

It is, but is not anything; it sees, but sees not anything; it hears, but hears not anything; it knows, but knows not anything.
It does not go to where it was not, it does not get what it did not have. Even the expression (It knew only itself)

[Walker]

Has the source of dattaswami's manifest energy been decided?
Considered?

- If the source is All, or God
- and because everyone has access to All, or God
- why does not everyone write like an encyclopedia?

Could it be ... energy?

Is dattaswami plugged-in?

[promethean75]

"It is, but is not anything; it sees, but sees not anything; it hears, but hears not anything; it knows, but knows not anything.
It does not go to where it was not, it does not get what it did not have. Even the expression (It knew only itself)"

Thank you ghost dog

[Walker]

They say this cute little fox can catch mice when he faces North because he tunes into earth energy.

Speculation or fact?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2SoGHFM18I

[dattaswami]

Everything is energy...continually changing and consciously manifesting into countless forms.

The many stories that we human beings make up based on human limitation and fear, which we try to apply to the 'infinite all-that-is', make no sense! There can be peace in considering that 'god/divine' energy is the energy within and throughout all which we can never be separated from. We are part of countless manifestations of energy: conscious, flowing, circulating.

We are not limited to (nor prisoners of) the dark and dense world and stories created by men, based on divisiveness and fear and separation from a god. We can manifest light, as countless beings do regardless of their spiritual affiliations or none at all. It's a natural potential of energy. If we put our intention toward being more conscious, rather than defending our identity and stories, how/what might we manifest?

Here's a short little video (one of many) that describes how all is energy, consciously manifesting in countless ways, which human beings assign different names to.
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=g ... &FORM=VIRE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbdOox6CT7M

[Age]

What are you talking about?

What I am talking about is that I NEVER mentioned NOR talked about what it was that you were talking about. 'you' KEEP MISSING the 'meaning'. And, this is BECAUSE 'you' ONLY LOOK AT the WAY I WRITE and NOT AT 'what' I ACTUALLY WRITE, AND MEAN.

Also, if you WANT me to respond, then I suggest you quote me, and NOT just write things. But, if you do NOT want a response, from me, then just carry on the way you did here.

That is; IF 'this' was even intended for me.

[Age]

Has the source of dattaswami's manifest energy been decided?
Considered?

- If the source is All, or God
- and because everyone has access to All, or God
- why does not everyone write like an encyclopedia?

BUT EVERY one, together, or collectively, LITERALLY, DOES write an encyclopedia. It could be said and argued that ALL knowledge is held up within human brains and their languages.

Could it be ... energy?

Is dattaswami plugged-in?

EVERY one is 'plugged-in' TO God/ALL. But NO one individual 'thing', besides the One and ONLY True 'Thing' of ALL, Itself, is able to express ALL knowledge.

[Age]

They say this cute little fox can catch mice when he faces North because he tunes into earth energy.

Speculation or fact?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2SoGHFM18I

Speculation OF COURSE. This is IRREFUTABLE by the words that WERE ACTUALLY USED.

[Dontaskme]

Everything is energy...continually changing and consciously manifesting into countless forms.

I agree, everything is energy.

Here is another expression of the same one energy expressing and describing itself differently.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxdKxS7KSvU
Death is an appearance.


In fact, birth and death are the same thing, they just differ in appearance, that's all.