Philosophy Now Forum

ken wrote:

Walker wrote:
The scientific purpose of par is to provide a standard, the purpose of which is to aim for birdies, eagles, the extremely rare double-eagle, and finally the Theory of Everything which shall remain undiscovered until science says what happens outside the brackets of beginning and end.

I would like to have a go at this because there is no beginning nor was there an end. Everything has an opposite sitting/resting in equilibrium, right HERE and right NOW, i.e., TOE.

Hello. Where do we go when the body dies?

Dalek Prime wrote:

Walker wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote:We do aim for uniformity.

Humans and time lords aim for the exceptional and are often satisfied with mud, dalek.

Ashes to ashes, dust to dust, mud to mud.

Ashes when ashes
Dust when dust
Mud when mud
...

And for daleks:
Rust when rust

Walker wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote:

Walker wrote: Humans and time lords aim for the exceptional and are often satisfied with mud, dalek.

Ashes to ashes, dust to dust, mud to mud.

Ashes when ashes
Dust when dust
Mud when mud
...

And for daleks:
Rust when rust

The void is perfect. Reality (irregularities in the void) is not. Leave the void be.

Lacewing wrote:

ken wrote:I have said that 'I' am God, and this obviously could be so easily misconstrued

Yes, it is tricky to step outside of conventions without seeming to be arrogantly "above" them, but I think you've done a good job of representing the balance/dynamic in your response.

Thanks so much for your feed back. Any and all feed back is most welcome here. It is also very inspiring as I learn from it all.

Lacewing wrote:

ken wrote:I just WAIT patiently for collective agreement before 'I' am revealed.

I understand this -- although I describe it a little differently for myself. I wait for the flow to show me the way to go. I try to stay out of the way, and not impose my will in a way that obstructs the larger flow. I observe "myself" in the flow. I am not attached to a specific identity of "who I am", rather I see myself as one potential manifestation of countless... and all are equally part of the greater flow. Just like no drop is more ultimately significant in the ocean than another drop.

Fully understand and great advice for when waiting to understand 'who am I', but just for arguments sake let us say I have got to 'Who I am' already. I know HOW I am now the whole ocean of water, which is the collective of every unique but no more ultimately significant droplet of water.

While i was waiting with absolutely no attachment to any specific identity at all that is when I realized that only when I could see and understand Thee collective agreement is when I could also now see from the "ocean's" perspective. I now knew who 'I' the ocean is and who 'i' the unique but no more special than another droplet is.

When I said, "I just WAIT patiently for collective agreement before 'I' am revealed." I mean I am HERE at the "oceans" perspective waiting for droplets of water to also be able to see from the collective oceans perspective and then 'I' am revealed to that droplet, which then moves up to KNOWING both 'i', the droplet, and 'I' the ocean.

For example 'i', ken, live in a country were the human beings like to eat cows, and lets say 'you' live in a country where they like to eat sheep, and lets say another 'you' lives in another country where they like to eat pigs, and one more 'you' lives in a country where they like to eat chickens. In each of those countries each of those 'you', and we will include 'ken' as a 'you' here, truly enjoys eating that type of meat they eat. They even say they love to eat it. But each of those four 'you' detest eating any of the other three animals. Each 'you' can not even understand how each of the other 'you' could even eat it let alone enjoy or even love eating it.

One day I was querying myself about why I did something that I thought was "normal" but others thought was "not normal" and I realized I only did it, and thought it was "normal", because of ALL of my past experiences put together. I realized that each and every human being is the exact same. Each 'you', droplet of water, in the world all acts and reacts the way they do to any and all situations solely because of ALL of the past experiences they have en counted. The sum of all experiences makes up the 'you'. This sum is held with-in the body as thoughts and feelings. The 'you', the unique and individual no more ultimately significant droplet of water 'you', is the person/ality living inside the body. The person is NOT the body, which is how we usually recognize each other. After all it is far easy to see a human body and its mis/behaviors than it is to actually see the invisible thoughts and feelings with-in a body. Anyway I could go on for days about what led to what and how that led to this and then how this led to.... so on and so on.

But when I then thought inquisitively about what meat is actually 'all right' or "normal" to eat i gained a perspective, instead of just from one droplet but, from the WHOLE collective ocean of droplets of water, i.e., a perspective that every droplet could agree upon collectively as One. After months and years of being able to see from this perspective instead of just from my own little 'you' perspective I came to realize that when one droplet is able to see from Everything's perspective, which is seen from KNOWING what Everything could agree with, then that is when the big 'I' was revealed. If and when one 'you' can see and know from Everythings' perspective, then 'I' am revealed.

Now, that 'I' am HERE 'I' just WAIT patiently for 'you' to be able to also see and know from Everythings' perspective for 'Me' to be revealed to 'you.

I have a tendency to go too far too quick so I will just leave it here for now. I know someone like you who is far more open than others can and will understand this a lot quicker it is still all fairly "new" stuff and can take a while to still 'digest'. But it is all food for thought after all.

Lacewing wrote:

ken wrote:there is not too many people I know that are in agreement on self-awareness and collective Self-awareness, the meaning of Life, the purpose for human beings being here, how the Mind and the brain works, the reason 'i' and 'I' exist, who/what 'i' and 'I' actually am/are, etc., etc.

At the same time, there seem to be many who are "plugged into" an unknown that is greater than themselves, even if they describe it in many different ways.

So true. 'I' am still surprised how "plugged into" the "ocean" that droplet 'dontaskme' me is. Unfortunately though, the 'person'' in that body absolutely distorts what 'I' am feeding deep with-in that 'person'. But hey 'I' am used to it. Look at how much 'I', the Ocean, have been inspiring droplets and how many of them have been inspired, but to no actual avail. If Truth been known ALL that 'I' have said has fallen on 'deaf ears". Just about everything I have said has been misconstrued, taken out of context, turned around and then used against the people I have inspired. This has been going on for thousands of years and still some people are still killing each other, in my name, and over my words. That is up till NOW.

Lacewing wrote:I, personally, do not think that there are absolute answers for any of these things -- so it makes no sense to me when someone tries to seriously tell me their version of answers.

If some one, droplet, is going to give "their" version, then the chances of it being THE absolute answer are going to so remote the odds, like the "answer/s" are not even worth looking at. However, that is NOT to say there are no absolute answers. Hear Me out first. 'You' did the right thing and used the word 'think' instead of 'believe' in relation to there are no absolute answers. As long as you ONLY 'think' there are none then you are still far more open than a person who 'believes' there are none. So you are on the right track but if you were honest with yourself then you you can not positively say either way if there is absolute answers or not. If you can see and say this, then you will become more open, and thus be able to learn quicker. The Truth is there is NO absolute answer, because it is better if every 'you' always remains open to further answers that may come along. HOWEVER, IF an answer is agreed upon by ALL things, then there is no other thing disputing that answer, therefore in of itself that answer is it could be said 'an absolute answer'. There is, it will be found, not a lot but a few of these absolute answers actually. However, 'I' must reiterate that that then does NOT mean people can then go and start 'believing' in those answers. It is ALWAYS better to ALWAYS remain open.

Lacewing wrote: I, too, have spent many years exploring all sorts of angles, deep and wide, personally and collectively.

That is the difference, 'i' the droplet, never search for anything. Heck i never believed in anything, due to the sum of all my experiences. I was fortunate not to believe nor disbelieve in much at all really. Because I was, in a sense, a nothing to the world I was able to look from an "outer" perspective in at the world and at 'My' "self". I was also not afraid to be totally Honest and Open because of being nothing I never feared being judged. I also seriously wanted to change from what I thought was "normal" to what was "accepted" just so that I could one day hopefully "fit in".

It was from this very strong desire to change AND be totally open and honest in doing so that gave me the "privilege" of discovering things that i really did not want to know but which were what i have heard others have been looking for. From being born into the most, some would say, underprivileged environment and eventually growing up, into the most "privileged" of circumstances I have found Self. I found Self not by discovery but by chance. I used double quotation marks around privilege because although it certain is a privilege to have learned and discovered what I have it always feels like a burden because I never learned how to be heard and because I was one of the most uneducated persons I have to keep practicing and practicing in how to read and write in order so that I can and will be heard all the time

Lacewing wrote:I think each person's experience is sacred for them -- and each person should not mistake that with knowing and telling another person which path is right to take.

I agree with this sentence. That is why to explain how to go or move, and dare i use the term "push", onto or along another path needs to be done very gently and softly. Finding the "right" words takes "time". 'I' am the last One ever who uses force. 'I' am only here with-in each and all of 'you' helping, guiding and enlightening but only to those who want help, guidance and "enlightenment". It is only those people who truly listen and learn. The other thing is 'I' do NOT show 'you' the way. I ONLY show 'you' how you, "yourself", can find the answers by and for "yourself".

Lacewing wrote:

ken wrote:If, however, every person at least just tries that way and ALL of us collectively come to the same conclusion and answers and we are ALL in agreement, then that way will be the RIGHT way, which i only "think" it is for now. Obviously there might be as many other awareness/ess as their are human beings and at the moment this is the most likely scenario.

Yes, why does there need to be a "right" way.

There does NOT "need" to be a "right" way. BUT if every person finds a way and it then coincidentally becomes the exact same way as every other person, then that would, in a way, be the 'right' way. If every person got to that same 'point', where they all want to be, in any number of ways then that is fine But if every person reached that point where they want to be from the same way, then so be it.

Lacewing wrote:Why would an infinite universe, so far beyond our fathoming on so many levels, have a right way?

To Me the infinite Universe may appear daunting but it really is NOT. Actually there is not that much at all to fathom. 'I' can imagine and KNOW how overly superior that may sound but with "time" this will ALL be explained. 'i' promise i was and still am only a very simple being, so if i can fathom and understand this then any one can. One issue with the human brain is it can turn anything around from what it really is.

Lacewing wrote:And what are the odds that all the people who want everyone else to see "their right way" are going to succeed in doing so, when there are so many different ones?

0 and nil.

Lacewing wrote:Might it be that such is perfect without narrowing it down to some human definition of "right"?

Again an issue with humans and more particularly the human brain is it sometimes can only look from its own perspective and only see that that perspective is "right". Luckily there is where the Mind, which is always fully and truly open steps in and shines the light at and on Truth. Only if and when the collective of ALL things is in agreement, then that light shines, on what is right and what is wrong.

Lacewing wrote:

ken wrote:Actually I would even go as far to say that EVERY person is already "THERE", which is a place no person could ever go beyond, but most are NOT conscious of this fact yet.

This assumes that there is ONE ultimate "there". Again... narrowing it down to a certain "rightness" based on human understanding.

'THERE' is a place where ALL are in agreement, not one human being, not some human beings, not even ALL human beings, but rather ALL things are in agreement. This is only basis for "rightness" that could truly exist.

Lacewing wrote:Why not many many "there's", all interwoven like notes in a symphony?

It is through the allowing of many many's ALL to reach their own "there" freely and totally unforcefully will it been seen if there is actually many many "there's". However, ONLY if and when ALL happen to reach a same 'THERE' in a totally free and unadulterated way that is when the proof of an all interwoven like notes in a symphony CAN come together, like One in peace and harmony.

If the notes are all over the "place", many "there's" and not in the same One "place" then the symphony would not be in harmony. The music has to come from the same One place in harmony and this could only happen if all the notes are together playing as One.

Lacewing wrote: Many different "there's" to experience... and no ultimate "there". Why do humans think there needs to be an "end point"... a climax... a pinnacle... a single point of perfection?

Because of the INNER driver and guider. The Instructor with-in who is Teaching will not let 'us', human beings rest until we have reached that Point. That Tutor with-in is sometimes referred to as In-Tuition.

Lacewing wrote:Can we conceive of an explosion of perfection?

I will have to clarify what you are actually asking with this one.

But 'perfection' is not some end point were all is lost and nothing gained. 'Perfection' is just having learned how to live in peace and harmony together as One but still with the endless possibilities of things to learn and discover. Living in peace and harmony with each other in an infinite "place" there is no shortage of new/er knowledge to be discovered and gained. 'We', human beings, have a WHOLE Universe for a backyard to go and discover and play in. There is absolutely no shortage of things to learn, do and achieve.

Lacewing wrote:

ken wrote:I would go as far to say that no one 'likes' to be "guided", because no one likes to be a follower.

It's sort of like "god" insulting "god". Or parts of "all that is" trying to oppress/direct other parts of "all that is".

The second sentence sounds "more" correct. I will leave this one for now.

Lacewing wrote:

ken wrote:By the way why did you use the word 'vastly' in relation to being open-minded?

I was trying to suggest that there are degrees to being open-minded. Some people may think they are open-minded to a greater degree than they actually are, not realizing that there's always more, more, more beyond where we are and what we see at any given time.

So true.

Lacewing wrote:So many want to "be there now"... be at the pinnacle... know the answers -- and I don't think any of that exists beyond our thinking.

As long as you keep using the word 'think' instead of 'believe', then I can not really say to much except maybe ask could the reason 'you' 'think' that is because 'you' have not yet experienced any of those answers?

People can not "instantly" know any thing if they have never ever experienced it. We could not have ever expected people of say two or three hundred years ago to know how to build and drive motor vehicles and/or build and fly airplanes, would we? But "here we are now" with those things. We also know that it would be wrong of them to 'believe' or 'think' that motor vehicles and airplanes would never become possible. If people continually did believe they were an impossible thing, then we would not have either of those things "here now". So, if 'you' peoples of "today" in the "here and now" do not 'think' that "there now" places.... with pinnacles... and answers...would or could ever exist, then that is totally understandable. But again that is because no person could ever know something if they have never had experiences, which lead to new findings or discoveries. But there is also absolutely no reason why any person should 'think' that any thing is not possible in the "future".

If and when people are living in the "future" and they are in the "new there" they will look back on "us", just like every generation does, and wonder, what would it have been like to live in such a "primitive" way?

Also, if it is this generation that starts the new peaceful way of life to begin, then it is "us" who they will be thanking. They will be living a way that most people now could not imagine and we are living in a way that they could not imagine nor would want to even dream about.

Lacewing wrote:

ken wrote:Does "...so that "we" could speak to 'it'.." imply "we" any or all people want to speak to "it", which is a person AND/OR the thing that appears to be an authority figure?

I just meant to offer some thoughts for discussion by those who feel pulled to do so... and to hopefully get people to notice what might apply to them and how they feel about that.

Well it has worked superbly for me.

Lacewing wrote:

ken wrote:So, how does 'it', the personal self, respect the One collective Self, well that is done by remaining fully and truly open so as to be able to look from and see from EVERYTHING's perspective, always and in all ways. To become and remain fully and truly open is to be able to disregard any and all previously obtained beliefs and assumptions.

Makes sense to me! I would just add that "playing along" seems like a form of openness and acceptance too. Let's have fun! Why would it be so serious and specific?

I could not agree more.

If any person thinks to 'live' is anything less than to have fun and enjoy, then i think they are sadly mis-taken.

Lacewing wrote:

ken wrote:

Lacewing wrote:Why would so many people think there is only one way to be ("their way")?

Because if one way is the only way one knows, then "that way" is literally "their (one and only) way". If a person has found or has become more enlightened "that way" and they feel love or rewarded from "that way", then they want to share "that" (way) with others. And obviously if they do not know of any other way, then they think "their way" is the only way.

But we can all look at our own histories... and realize how what we know today, is not what we thought we knew 20 years ago... and at each point along the path, did we not think "this is it"... "I've reached the pinnacle of understanding and rightness". Can we not step out of that loop and consider that it might/probably never end... there will always be MORE to realize... new understandings gained... more superstitions and fears to let go of? Why would we not welcome this?

LOL i wish i read this before. I have only just repeated earlier on what you have said here.

Lacewing wrote:Can we see how our ego resists this?

Yes and when the little ego is let go all together so is all superstitions and fears as well. That is when we reach that "next level" of human endeavors, i.e., living in peace and harmony together as One. but still with the knowledge of knowing there is an infinite of MORE to be realized. "Working" together as One just allows all future endeavors to flow smoothly and easily and fall into place like water finding It Self instead of each droplet trying to push, pull down and resist each other.

Lacewing wrote:

ken wrote:The One and ONLY way that is the true, right, and correct way IS the one that ALL of us agree upon.

I guess it all comes down to who can formulate a (or "their") way, which will best be suited for every One first.

This doesn't ring true for me. It sounds like a pointless race to an imaginary pinnacle by a bunch of drops in the ocean. When we take away all of the human "thinking"... with its agendas and fears and desires and judgments and definitions and measurements... then none of that remains to assign or declare anything at all.

Very true, and what I wrote highlights when the individual and separate 'personal' drop wants to fulfill its own agenda and fear and desire and judgement before putting the whole Ocean to the forefront. Thanks to your comment it is so obvious now in my words how one drip in the Ocean wants to rush and push the whole lot, of Ocean, along. The effort and energy that would take would destroy any drop.

From my own personal agenda i wanted to be the person to formulate "a way" first so that i am for once recognized and accepted for who i am. I wanted to do this so that my fear of being rejected is quashed, my desire to be heard is finally fulfilled and my feeling of being continually mis-judged and unwanted by all others is over completely.

The human "thinking" was trying to take over, control and rush what I know will be heard when I am ready to be revealed.

Lacewing wrote:Thanks again for your response. I enjoyed exploring these concepts with you.

Thanks for keeping me in check and on track. I am enjoying this too more than i could ever express.

Walker wrote:

ken wrote:

Walker wrote:
The scientific purpose of par is to provide a standard, the purpose of which is to aim for birdies, eagles, the extremely rare double-eagle, and finally the Theory of Everything which shall remain undiscovered until science says what happens outside the brackets of beginning and end.

I would like to have a go at this because there is no beginning nor was there an end. Everything has an opposite sitting/resting in equilibrium, right HERE and right NOW, i.e., TOE.

Hello. Where do we go when the body dies?

Sorry but i will have to get you to define 'we' a bit better for me.

Do you mean person?

I mean for you to write something other than questions.

ken wrote:just for arguments sake let us say I have got to 'Who I am' already. I know HOW I am now the whole ocean of water, which is the collective of every unique but no more ultimately significant droplet of water.

While i was waiting with absolutely no attachment to any specific identity at all that is when I realized that only when I could see and understand Thee collective agreement is when I could also now see from the "ocean's" perspective. I now knew who 'I' the ocean is and who 'i' the unique but no more special than another droplet is.

When I said, "I just WAIT patiently for collective agreement before 'I' am revealed." I mean I am HERE at the "oceans" perspective waiting for droplets of water to also be able to see from the collective oceans perspective and then 'I' am revealed to that droplet, which then moves up to KNOWING both 'i', the droplet, and 'I' the ocean.

I understand. And it's actually rather exciting to see this expressed and discussed... but I will admit, that language really gets in the way, and can be a huge turnoff, and then the communication is lost.

ken wrote:when one droplet is able to see from Everything's perspective, which is seen from KNOWING what Everything could agree with, then that is when the big 'I' was revealed. If and when one 'you' can see and know from Everythings' perspective, then 'I' am revealed.

"Agreement" sounds like a human concept to me. I'm more inclined to think that no agreement is needed... and that anything is okay.

ken wrote:Now, that 'I' am HERE 'I' just WAIT patiently for 'you' to be able to also see and know from Everythings' perspective for 'Me' to be revealed to 'you.

This is where our language starts being especially inadequate and offensive/coarse for expressing these concepts. Surely there is a better way than tangling with "I" and "you".

I do "get it", Ken. I've had my own experiences of seeing from behind the curtain in such a way that I could never forget it nor see this world the same way again. I am open to everything shifting such that my awareness, and that of my community, will know/understand ourselves within a larger flow in a whole new way. I suspect that the past world will not matter at all, and that many of the values and judgments will immediately fall away because they've always been meaningless and we will cease clinging to them.

ken wrote:

Lacewing wrote: I, too, have spent many years exploring all sorts of angles, deep and wide, personally and collectively.

That is the difference, 'i' the droplet, never search for anything.

To me, exploring and searching are not the same thing. I do not search either. But I explore what I come across. I am not looking for anything. I don't have any ideas about it. I don't have an agenda for it. Rather, I stay open and step forward and say, "Ah!".

ken wrote:Heck i never believed in anything, due to the sum of all my experiences. I was fortunate not to believe nor disbelieve in much at all really. Because I was, in a sense, a nothing to the world I was able to look from an "outer" perspective in at the world and at 'My' "self". I was also not afraid to be totally Honest and Open because of being nothing I never feared being judged. I also seriously wanted to change from what I thought was "normal" to what was "accepted" just so that I could one day hopefully "fit in".

Thanks for sharing this. Very interesting.

Growing up, I had the sense that I had to "slow myself down" if I was to "share the path in the company of a group". And I really did want to share the path. But it was frustrating to go slower than I wanted to go.

ken wrote:It was from this very strong desire to change AND be totally open and honest in doing so that gave me the "privilege" of discovering things that i really did not want to know but which were what i have heard others have been looking for. From being born into the most, some would say, underprivileged environment and eventually growing up, into the most "privileged" of circumstances I have found Self. I found Self not by discovery but by chance. I used double quotation marks around privilege because although it certain is a privilege to have learned and discovered what I have it always feels like a burden because I never learned how to be heard and because I was one of the most uneducated persons I have to keep practicing and practicing in how to read and write in order so that I can and will be heard all the time

Again, very interesting. I have no comments or questions... I'm just taking it in.

Lacewing wrote:I think each person's experience is sacred for them -- and each person should not mistake that with knowing and telling another person which path is right to take.

ken wrote:If every person got to that same 'point', where they all want to be, in any number of ways then that is fine But if every person reached that point where they want to be from the same way, then so be it.

Okay, so I can relate this to the idea of sharing a vibration/frequency together. It's just that (for me) the word "right" has too much association with judgment... and I envision a vibration/frequency that works with OTHER energies.

ken wrote:To Me the infinite Universe may appear daunting but it really is NOT. Actually there is not that much at all to fathom.

Yes, I can see this. It's actually very natural and simple. It is all of our convoluted stuff that creates the tangle. It is from within that tangle that I think "fathoming" is a challenge. But when we get outside of our complex human constructs, it all fits and flows quite perfectly without effort.

ken wrote:

Lacewing wrote:Can we conceive of an explosion of perfection?

I will have to clarify what you are actually asking with this one.

Rather than seeking our own ideal of a singular point or position of perfection, might it be that there are many... like the facets of a diamond. I am wary of what any human identifies as a singular ultimate point or position of perfection. Not only do I think we don't know of it, I'm not sure such a thing even exists on/in our terms. Rather, what IS... is not defined by, or limited by, our words and thinking.

ken wrote:As long as you keep using the word 'think' instead of 'believe', then I can not really say to much except maybe ask could the reason 'you' 'think' that is because 'you' have not yet experienced any of those answers?

I think I do it more because of my own brand of logic... which questions human interpretations and concepts for just about everything, because I think we are so fully intoxicated by being in this dense, heavy "reality".

One solution for over-thinking appears (to me) to be "clarity" -- letting it all go, and resting/floating in a clear space. In that space, there's no need for "answers" so-to-speak, rather... everything is just known.

ken wrote:People can not "instantly" know any thing if they have never ever experienced it.

Hmm... I'm not so sure of this. Haven't there been countless examples of people who suddenly know things that they should have no reason for knowing? (Maybe I misunderstood the point you were making.)

ken wrote:If and when people are living in the "future" and they are in the "new there" they will look back on "us", just like every generation does, and wonder, what would it have been like to live in such a "primitive" way?

I've thought that. Although, I like to envision that the shift will be SO significant and "complete", that there will be no desire/need to "think back" and ponder at all -- in that it will have no more significance than a dream.

ken wrote:Also, if it is this generation that starts the new peaceful way of life to begin, then it is "us" who they will be thanking. They will be living a way that most people now could not imagine and we are living in a way that they could not imagine nor would want to even dream about.

I'm having an experience like this right now... of uniquely connecting with a young woman quite a bit younger than I am, as we both envision the same kind of qualities/challenges for the future, and we get to treasure/utilize my land and the infrastructure I've set up... as we journey forward as friends. I feel so grateful to see this starting to happen -- and to experience the commonality between our spirits, which transcends all the "surface stuff". We both get to learn and experience this transitional time on this planet together. Gentle... open... happy... inspired... Amazing! I think there can be many more people doing this (if they open their hearts and choose clarity)... and perhaps we've now evolved to a place where such a shift can happen more widespread.

It feels like this, that you said:

Yes and when the little ego is let go all together so is all superstitions and fears as well. That is when we reach that "next level" of human endeavors, i.e., living in peace and harmony together as One. but still with the knowledge of knowing there is an infinite of MORE to be realized. "Working" together as One just allows all future endeavors to flow smoothly and easily and fall into place like water finding It Self instead of each droplet trying to push, pull down and resist each other.

Sweet.

ken wrote:From my own personal agenda i wanted to be the person to formulate "a way" first so that i am for once recognized and accepted for who i am. I wanted to do this so that my fear of being rejected is quashed, my desire to be heard is finally fulfilled and my feeling of being continually mis-judged and unwanted by all others is over completely.

The human "thinking" was trying to take over, control and rush what I know will be heard when I am ready to be revealed.

Yes, no effort needed... just flowing oneness. I really think we could all be ecstatic if we were paying attention to it.

ken wrote:Sorry but i will have to get you to define 'we' a bit better for me.
Do you mean person?

Walker wrote:I mean for you to write something other than questions.

Really, that is the expectation, and I thought, go for the gusto ken.

Did you think I meant for you to literally answer the question?

Take it anywhere you want to go. Should be easy since no one has the verifiable answer.

Science sure doesn't.

ken wrote:Sorry but i will have to get you to define 'we' a bit better for me.
Do you mean person?

Walker wrote:I mean for you to write something other than questions.

Walker wrote:Really, that is the expectation, and I thought, go for the gusto ken.

Did you think I meant for you to literally answer the question?

ken wrote:You may not have meant it, but if a question is asked, especially in a philosophy forum, then I certainly do think that ALL questions should be answered. I, for one, am certainly prepared to reply to and answer any and every question asked of me. In fact I LOVE the challenge, and being questioned is certainly what I have been asking for.

Walker wrote:Take it anywhere you want to go. Should be easy since no one has the verifiable answer.

Science sure doesn't.

Do not be so sure, until ALL avenues have been explored. I think science can and will verify everything I have to say.

"Where do we go when the body dies?" IS no where. There is only One Existence (or Life) and that is where we stay, after the body dies. The 'here-after' and 'after-life' are NOT other places. 'We' stay HERE, after the body dies.

'We', individually, are the thoughts and feelings (emotions) with-in one human body. A 'person' is NOT the human body. If 'we' are the human body, then how much of a "person" we are would be depended upon how much of a body there is or is not. This is not correct. What a 'person', is IS all the thoughts and internal feelings with-in a human body. Because all thoughts and emotional feelings are invisible and non-physical where a 'person' actually resides is not known but we could generally regard we exist with-in the brain. But 'we', the thoughts and feelings are not the brain.

After a human body and brain "dies" the individual person remain with the rest of 'us' who are still growing in the sense of changing thoughts and changing emotionally. For example if the body walker's grandparents were in have both 'died', i.e., stopped breathing and pumping blood,then all those memories 'you' have (and are) which they instilled in you are actually keeping them alive and living with you. This is the story of how jesus "came back to life" and is still apparently living with us today. As long as a memory of a person is still remembered then that person is still living with us, HERE, now.

Also, a person, who is not necessarily remembered because the body they were living in existed tens, hundreds, thousands, or even millions of years ago can still be "living" with us today because of what they were thinking and thought back then. The person who thought up and invented the wheel for example is in a way still existing or living with us today through that creation. If and when thinking about a wheel or any thing that is in relation to a wheel, then that is "them", the prior thinking, still alive today in "us", the current thinking. Another way of looking at this from this perspective is if 'you' guide your children to act or behave in a certain way because "that way" was the way your father or mother told you how to act or behave, which actually came from how they were told how to act or behave from their parent, which was influence from their parent and so on, then that is how 'one person', one set of thoughts, can and does stay here. 'we' NEVER leave. Although the exact "same way" may not be being passed on down exactly, the influence that those 'thoughts', the person, has and have are being 'passed-on'. 'Thoughts' are the person or the being part in human being, being passed-on. The 'human' in human being is the physical body part. Thoughts, the person, do not pass-away and go somewhere else. A 'person' gets passed-on or passed-down along through the line here in the One and only same life, which is the HERE and NOW. 'Per-son', 'per', through, and, 'son', son of human-kind, i.e., thoughts being passed through brains from parent to child, continuously. The only time a person actually passes on is when they are completely forgotten about and if they had not influenced any other 'person', thoughts and feelings. But even if a brand new born baby body dies at birth, the person with-in that body, the very limited thoughts (if any) and feelings, the 'person/ality', the reality of that person will have influenced the persons who were the parents who then would influence other beings.

A human body also does not "die" in the context of it going somewhere else also. Every body, like all matter, just changes in shape and form but still remains HERE in this one and only Life. After a human body 'dies', stops breathing, it just starts decaying and continually re-forms back into shape with ALL other matter. Earth to earth, as they say. Or, if a non-breathing human body is burnt, then it just returns to ashes. Ashes with then are nutrients for a (mother) earth that then provides for human beings in order so that they can keep procreating and propagating, that is of course until human beings destroy their one at only home, at the moment.

By the way we say 'we' grow old but the truth is the human body may appear to grow old, and then start decaying after it stops breathing and pumping blood but it really is just matter changing in shape and form. Another new thing to look at is 'we' the person inside never grow older. We always become newer. Every day, every hour, every minute and even every second we are always continually changing. The thoughts and feelings are always changing. Thoughts, in fact, always be-come anew, and therefore 'we' are always becoming new/er. Not old/er. That is while the body is still living anyway. After the body dies 'we' just remain, HERE, as memories. And, what we have invented, created and/or caused can be seen in what 'we' have had in/fluence upon in the environment.

'We', collectively, however is not the thought (knowledge) but is the one agreed upon knowing (knowledge).This 'knowing', like thoughts and feelings is invisible and non-physical, and although it could be argued is also held with-in the brain, 'knowing' is seen and known from the Mind. The Mind, unlike the brain, is invisible and non-physical, which where it is we can not actually put our "finger" on. The Mind, however, is NOT just in one physical human body and different within other physical bodies like thoughts and feelings are. There is only One Mind, like Life, It Self, which exists in ALL physical human bodies. "When we put the Mind to it we can do anything". "When we put the Mind to it we can learn anything". If we use the open Mind we can and do dream up of anything, and then we can learn how to make it anything. The open Mind allows us to look back in the past as far as we can and allows us to see all the way into the future as far as we can, and anywhere in between. The brain only has a limited view either way, whereas, the Mind is infinite and eternal.

When we individually are able to see from another point of view, i.e., empathy, then that is also because the one Mind, which is with-in all bodies. If and when we individually are looking and can see an "answer", which is an answer that every individual could agree on and with, then we are at a level of 'knowing', which obviously could only be proven correct if and when every individual does agree. But being able to 'know' what "others" know can only be done through a truly open Mind. Anyway, 'We' collectively are the 'knowing' knowledge of right and wrong, that lives in this One and only Mind, which is unlike the 'thinking' knowledge that does not know right and wrong, that lives in the multitude of separate brains. After any body 'dies', 'We' collectively, also do NOT go anywhere else. 'We', the Mind, just exist right HERE and right NOW, always have and always will, forever and eternally.

So,

'we', small w, individually, do not go anywhere after the body dies. The invisible and non-physical thoughts and feelings held with-in the physical brain, which i call the soul, lives with-in a physical brain and just passes on or flows through those other brains that that soul comes into contact with, for as long as it does.

'We', collectively, also do not go anywhere after the body dies. The invisible and non-physical knowing held with-in the invisible and non-physical Mind, which i call the Spirit, lives with-in ALL physical things and can and does transcend through ALL physical things, eternally. 'Knowing' does not go anywhere. 'It' always just stays the same, right HERE

ken wrote: Do not be so sure, until ALL avenues have been explored. I think science can and will verify everything I have to say.

"Where do we go when the body dies?" IS no where. There is only One Existence (or Life) and that is where we stay, after the body dies. The 'here-after' and 'after-life' are NOT other places. 'We' stay HERE, after the body dies.

'We', individually, are the thoughts and feelings (emotions) with-in one human body. A 'person' is NOT the human body. If 'we' are the human body, then how much of a "person" we are would be depended upon how much of a body there is or is not. This is not correct. What a 'person', is IS all the thoughts and internal feelings with-in a human body. Because all thoughts and emotional feelings are invisible and non-physical where a 'person' actually resides is not known but we could generally regard we exist with-in the brain. But 'we', the thoughts and feelings are not the brain.

After a human body and brain "dies" the individual person remain with the rest of 'us' who are still growing in the sense of changing thoughts and changing emotionally. For example if the body walker's grandparents were in have both 'died', i.e., stopped breathing and pumping blood,then all those memories 'you' have (and are) which they instilled in you are actually keeping them alive and living with you. This is the story of how jesus "came back to life" and is still apparently living with us today. As long as a memory of a person is still remembered then that person is still living with us, HERE, now.

Also, a person, who is not necessarily remembered because the body they were living in existed tens, hundreds, thousands, or even millions of years ago can still be "living" with us today because of what they were thinking and thought back then. The person who thought up and invented the wheel for example is in a way still existing or living with us today through that creation. If and when thinking about a wheel or any thing that is in relation to a wheel, then that is "them", the prior thinking, still alive today in "us", the current thinking. Another way of looking at this from this perspective is if 'you' guide your children to act or behave in a certain way because "that way" was the way your father or mother told you how to act or behave, which actually came from how they were told how to act or behave from their parent, which was influence from their parent and so on, then that is how 'one person', one set of thoughts, can and does stay here. 'we' NEVER leave. Although the exact "same way" may not be being passed on down exactly, the influence that those 'thoughts', the person, has and have are being 'passed-on'. 'Thoughts' are the person or the being part in human being, being passed-on. The 'human' in human being is the physical body part. Thoughts, the person, do not pass-away and go somewhere else. A 'person' gets passed-on or passed-down along through the line here in the One and only same life, which is the HERE and NOW. 'Per-son', 'per', through, and, 'son', son of human-kind, i.e., thoughts being passed through brains from parent to child, continuously. The only time a person actually passes on is when they are completely forgotten about and if they had not influenced any other 'person', thoughts and feelings. But even if a brand new born baby body dies at birth, the person with-in that body, the very limited thoughts (if any) and feelings, the 'person/ality', the reality of that person will have influenced the persons who were the parents who then would influence other beings.

A human body also does not "die" in the context of it going somewhere else also. Every body, like all matter, just changes in shape and form but still remains HERE in this one and only Life. After a human body 'dies', stops breathing, it just starts decaying and continually re-forms back into shape with ALL other matter. Earth to earth, as they say. Or, if a non-breathing human body is burnt, then it just returns to ashes. Ashes with then are nutrients for a (mother) earth that then provides for human beings in order so that they can keep procreating and propagating, that is of course until human beings destroy their one at only home, at the moment.

By the way we say 'we' grow old but the truth is the human body may appear to grow old, and then start decaying after it stops breathing and pumping blood but it really is just matter changing in shape and form. Another new thing to look at is 'we' the person inside never grow older. We always become newer. Every day, every hour, every minute and even every second we are always continually changing. The thoughts and feelings are always changing. Thoughts, in fact, always be-come anew, and therefore 'we' are always becoming new/er. Not old/er. That is while the body is still living anyway. After the body dies 'we' just remain, HERE, as memories. And, what we have invented, created and/or caused can be seen in what 'we' have had in/fluence upon in the environment.

'We', collectively, however is not the thought (knowledge) but is the one agreed upon knowing (knowledge).This 'knowing', like thoughts and feelings is invisible and non-physical, and although it could be argued is also held with-in the brain, 'knowing' is seen and known from the Mind. The Mind, unlike the brain, is invisible and non-physical, which where it is we can not actually put our "finger" on. The Mind, however, is NOT just in one physical human body and different within other physical bodies like thoughts and feelings are. There is only One Mind, like Life, It Self, which exists in ALL physical human bodies. "When we put the Mind to it we can do anything". "When we put the Mind to it we can learn anything". If we use the open Mind we can and do dream up of anything, and then we can learn how to make it anything. The open Mind allows us to look back in the past as far as we can and allows us to see all the way into the future as far as we can, and anywhere in between. The brain only has a limited view either way, whereas, the Mind is infinite and eternal.

When we individually are able to see from another point of view, i.e., empathy, then that is also because the one Mind, which is with-in all bodies. If and when we individually are looking and can see an "answer", which is an answer that every individual could agree on and with, then we are at a level of 'knowing', which obviously could only be proven correct if and when every individual does agree. But being able to 'know' what "others" know can only be done through a truly open Mind. Anyway, 'We' collectively are the 'knowing' knowledge of right and wrong, that lives in this One and only Mind, which is unlike the 'thinking' knowledge that does not know right and wrong, that lives in the multitude of separate brains. After any body 'dies', 'We' collectively, also do NOT go anywhere else. 'We', the Mind, just exist right HERE and right NOW, always have and always will, forever and eternally.

So,

'we', small w, individually, do not go anywhere after the body dies. The invisible and non-physical thoughts and feelings held with-in the physical brain, which i call the soul, lives with-in a physical brain and just passes on or flows through those other brains that that soul comes into contact with, for as long as it does.

'We', collectively, also do not go anywhere after the body dies. The invisible and non-physical knowing held with-in the invisible and non-physical Mind, which i call the Spirit, lives with-in ALL physical things and can and does transcend through ALL physical things, eternally. 'Knowing' does not go anywhere. 'It' always just stays the same, right HERE

The problem with this is that it is that the memory other people have of you is not you. No one knows you the way you do. What other people know of you is just their subjective opinion of you. The memory they carry is their interpretation of you.

The work you do or the influence you have on other people is also not you. A person is much more than his or her achievements or other people's memories of them. We don't know if the guy who invented the wheel had a sense of humor or not. Maybe he invented the wheel in a day and that became his legacy. He could have been an accomplished musician of his time, or a great mathematician whose work got burned when his village got pillaged. The real him could have been the musician or the mathematician. What we know is he invented the wheel. That is one accomplishment in a whole life. We don't know what he struggled with and what he failed at. A person is far far far more than memories or achievements.

No person can be summed up by the memories of them or their achievements alone.
So when one dies, one dies. Memories are just memories. Achievements are just a legacy left behind till they become obsolete.

Lacewing wrote:

ken wrote:just for arguments sake let us say I have got to 'Who I am' already. I know HOW I am now the whole ocean of water, which is the collective of every unique but no more ultimately significant droplet of water.

While i was waiting with absolutely no attachment to any specific identity at all that is when I realized that only when I could see and understand Thee collective agreement is when I could also now see from the "ocean's" perspective. I now knew who 'I' the ocean is and who 'i' the unique but no more special than another droplet is.

When I said, "I just WAIT patiently for collective agreement before 'I' am revealed." I mean I am HERE at the "oceans" perspective waiting for droplets of water to also be able to see from the collective oceans perspective and then 'I' am revealed to that droplet, which then moves up to KNOWING both 'i', the droplet, and 'I' the ocean.

I understand. And it's actually rather exciting to see this expressed and discussed... but I will admit, that language really gets in the way, and can be a huge turnoff, and then the communication is lost.

Is that 'my' language or 'language' itself that really gets in the way here?

Lacewing wrote:

ken wrote:when one droplet is able to see from Everything's perspective, which is seen from KNOWING what Everything could agree with, then that is when the big 'I' was revealed. If and when one 'you' can see and know from Everythings' perspective, then 'I' am revealed.

"Agreement" sounds like a human concept to me. I'm more inclined to think that no agreement is needed... and that anything is okay.

No anything is needed anywhere throughout the Universe, including agreement, the Universe will keep just keep on keeping on infinitely and eternally like It always has and always will. Everything is okay no matter what happens. BUT, if, and ONLY if, everything just happens to come together in agreement FIRST, then without liking to state the obvious 'agreement' is reached. Agreement has been made like it is in peace and harmony.

'Trying' to find answers or 'trying' to find agreement or 'trying' to find peace in harmony has proven NOT to work. In fact the 'trying to' in so many different ways can actually and a lot of the time has caused the opposite to happen.

I want to say now, but I know a way that works for me and if you try it....

BUT how contradictory does that sound?

Some will say but where is the proof, and I will say I can only give 'My word' because I do not want to provide the 'proof', the answers. There is not going to be to many people, even one?, who want to listen to this, because of all the past experiences, what people call lies or more commonly now BS.

That is why I am here learning how to express better so that I can show "a way" without "that way" actually appearing obvious but actually does take people to an "end place" but without providing any "answers" so that if and when they get HERE and they happen to have the exact same actual "answers" or not, then I will know that is was actually the "Right" way or just another wrong way.

Lacewing wrote:

ken wrote:Now, that 'I' am HERE 'I' just WAIT patiently for 'you' to be able to also see and know from Everythings' perspective for 'Me' to be revealed to 'you.

This is where our language starts being especially inadequate and offensive/coarse for expressing these concepts. Surely there is a better way than tangling with "I" and "you".

'I', is the collective 'us' and 'you', is the individual 'us', ken included. But I agree 100% that it could come across as offensive/course. If I had the "right" language now already, then i would not have to be here to learn how to express better. Discussions here help 'Me', collective us, to learn MORE from 'you', all individuals.

Hopefully, through discussions here a better way out this entanglement will appear. I am sure you could help provide a better way untangle "I" and "you".

Lacewing wrote:I think each person's experience is sacred for them -- and each person should not mistake that with knowing and telling another person which path is right to take.

Lacewing wrote:

ken wrote:If every person got to that same 'point', where they all want to be, in any number of ways then that is fine But if every person reached that point where they want to be from the same way, then so be it.

Okay, so I can relate this to the idea of sharing a vibration/frequency together. It's just that (for me) the word "right" has too much association with judgment... and I envision a vibration/frequency that works with OTHER energies.

Words like "Right" and "Truth" only exist AFTER everyone is in One collective agreement for the reason given before and that is there is no thing saying that "it" is not "right" or not "Truth". These "Right" and "Truth" words are used to separate what is universally collectively 'knowing' from what is just human individual 'thinking'. The "Right" and "Truth" knowing also can not be believed in as we know what happens when people believe (in) things like for example even if everyone believes the sun revolves the earth just one person may come along with "Right Truth", so we have to remain always.

Lacewing wrote:

ken wrote:To Me the infinite Universe may appear daunting but it really is NOT. Actually there is not that much at all to fathom.

Yes, I can see this. It's actually very natural and simple. It is all of our convoluted stuff that creates the tangle. It is from within that tangle that I think "fathoming" is a challenge. But when we get outside of our complex human constructs, it all fits and flows quite perfectly without effort.

This is when i say just look from the Mind, which is always open and thus is able to see ALL things, instead of just looking from the brain, which is very very limited in its ability to see, learn and understand.

Lacewing wrote:

ken wrote:

Lacewing wrote:Can we conceive of an explosion of perfection?

I will have to clarify what you are actually asking with this one.

Rather than seeking our own ideal of a singular point or position of perfection, might it be that there are many... like the facets of a diamond. I am wary of what any human identifies as a singular ultimate point or position of perfection. Not only do I think we don't know of it, I'm not sure such a thing even exists on/in our terms. Rather, what IS... is not defined by, or limited by, our words and thinking.

Nothing what human beings think or is ideal to them now is NOT even close to what will come when ALL have reached a place/point where ALL are in agreement. From a truly collective as One point of view then this is from "God's" view and that is what IS, which is not limited by human words or thinking at all.

I agree seeking 'our', human' ideal of a singular point or position of perfection is senseless as every human being can have a different ideal, etc. Only after every one reachs a point, where ALL are in agreement of this being the point that we all wanted to be in/at, then that is "perfection", if that word works there.

Lacewing wrote:

ken wrote:As long as you keep using the word 'think' instead of 'believe', then I can not really say to much except maybe ask could the reason 'you' 'think' that is because 'you' have not yet experienced any of those answers?

I think I do it more because of my own brand of logic... which questions human interpretations and concepts for just about everything, because I think we are so fully intoxicated by being in this dense, heavy "reality".

One solution for over-thinking appears (to me) to be "clarity" -- letting it all go, and resting/floating in a clear space. In that space, there's no need for "answers" so-to-speak, rather... everything is just known.

What is already 'known', IS the answers.

Where that 'space' is where Everything is known IS in the always open Mind. The answers are already existing HERE.

Looking for answers, from the brain, will never be found.

Lacewing wrote:

ken wrote:People can not "instantly" know any thing if they have never ever experienced it.

Hmm... I'm not so sure of this. Haven't there been countless examples of people who suddenly know things that they should have no reason for knowing? (Maybe I misunderstood the point you were making.)

Yes you did misunderstand only a little, but that is because of the way i clumsily wrote.

Meaningful knowing is "instantly" known from the Mind. Things that really matter in Life we already know, and when we find out how to uncover them, then we can know how to "instantly" know them once and for all. From this perspective people can "instantly" know even if they have not experienced it, yet.

What I was meaning to express was people's knowledge of physical things and how to create new human made things can not be "instantly" known. We each are building on top of and from each past person. This is like the saying similar to we stand on top of other's shoulders. Any "new" thought in relation to creating something new or discovery of something old ONLY comes about from the putting together of at least two other thoughts or knowledge that a person already has or people already have. And any and ALL thoughts or knowledge that a person already has or people already have has come from past experiences. From this perspective people can not "instantly" know any thing if they have never ever experienced it without at least two pieces of previous knowledge put together in order to learn and know the "new" knowledge.

Lacewing wrote:

ken wrote:If and when people are living in the "future" and they are in the "new there" they will look back on "us", just like every generation does, and wonder, what would it have been like to live in such a "primitive" way?

I've thought that. Although, I like to envision that the shift will be SO significant and "complete", that there will be no desire/need to "think back" and ponder at all -- in that it will have no more significance than a dream.

Of course there will be no desire/need to "think back" and ponder at all, BUT human beings LOVE to ponder, if we did not, then we would not be this far "advanced" as we are now. Although there will be no desire nor need to think back and ponder I am pretty sure there will be some who just love to do that more than others. The beauty of reaching "perfection" where every person is in agreement is that every person is still totally free to think about and ponder about anything at all that they want AND every individual person WILL think about and ponder about whatever that is that they want to think about and ponder about. The real beauty is in that we ALL individually ARE different in what we like to think and ponder about. The beauty of Life is we human beings are made up of the exact same stuff, i.e., a human body and invisible thoughts and feelings. We ALL are the exact same this way BUT we are just as equally individually different because of what we actual think and feel.

Lacewing wrote:

ken wrote:From my own personal agenda i wanted to be the person to formulate "a way" first so that i am for once recognized and accepted for who i am. I wanted to do this so that my fear of being rejected is quashed, my desire to be heard is finally fulfilled and my feeling of being continually mis-judged and unwanted by all others is over completely.

The human "thinking" was trying to take over, control and rush what I know will be heard when I am ready to be revealed.

Yes, no effort needed... just flowing oneness. I really think we could all be ecstatic if we were paying attention to it.

I KNOW we will ALL be ecstatic when we are truly listening to 'our' own collective One Self instead of listening to our individual own one self.

Being able to listen to and see from the One and only True Self is a very easy thing to do, but only after once learning how to do it. However, just like everything else that is learned, is easy once you know how, nothing can be taught if it is not want to be learned.

For example I can teach any person how to build and control a flying ship, which can and will travel in time, if a person wants to learn how to build and fly it. If a person does not want to learn and know this, then that is fair enough. No person has to learn anything if they do not want to learn it. However, what is really frustrating is I can not even talk to nor even show a person any proof of how to build and control a flying ship, which can travel in time, if a person believes it is not possible do so.

sthitapragya wrote:

ken wrote: Do not be so sure, until ALL avenues have been explored. I think science can and will verify everything I have to say.

"Where do we go when the body dies?" IS no where. There is only One Existence (or Life) and that is where we stay, after the body dies. The 'here-after' and 'after-life' are NOT other places. 'We' stay HERE, after the body dies.

'We', individually, are the thoughts and feelings (emotions) with-in one human body. A 'person' is NOT the human body. If 'we' are the human body, then how much of a "person" we are would be depended upon how much of a body there is or is not. This is not correct. What a 'person', is IS all the thoughts and internal feelings with-in a human body. Because all thoughts and emotional feelings are invisible and non-physical where a 'person' actually resides is not known but we could generally regard we exist with-in the brain. But 'we', the thoughts and feelings are not the brain.

After a human body and brain "dies" the individual person remain with the rest of 'us' who are still growing in the sense of changing thoughts and changing emotionally. For example if the body walker's grandparents were in have both 'died', i.e., stopped breathing and pumping blood,then all those memories 'you' have (and are) which they instilled in you are actually keeping them alive and living with you. This is the story of how jesus "came back to life" and is still apparently living with us today. As long as a memory of a person is still remembered then that person is still living with us, HERE, now.

Also, a person, who is not necessarily remembered because the body they were living in existed tens, hundreds, thousands, or even millions of years ago can still be "living" with us today because of what they were thinking and thought back then. The person who thought up and invented the wheel for example is in a way still existing or living with us today through that creation. If and when thinking about a wheel or any thing that is in relation to a wheel, then that is "them", the prior thinking, still alive today in "us", the current thinking. Another way of looking at this from this perspective is if 'you' guide your children to act or behave in a certain way because "that way" was the way your father or mother told you how to act or behave, which actually came from how they were told how to act or behave from their parent, which was influence from their parent and so on, then that is how 'one person', one set of thoughts, can and does stay here. 'we' NEVER leave. Although the exact "same way" may not be being passed on down exactly, the influence that those 'thoughts', the person, has and have are being 'passed-on'. 'Thoughts' are the person or the being part in human being, being passed-on. The 'human' in human being is the physical body part. Thoughts, the person, do not pass-away and go somewhere else. A 'person' gets passed-on or passed-down along through the line here in the One and only same life, which is the HERE and NOW. 'Per-son', 'per', through, and, 'son', son of human-kind, i.e., thoughts being passed through brains from parent to child, continuously. The only time a person actually passes on is when they are completely forgotten about and if they had not influenced any other 'person', thoughts and feelings. But even if a brand new born baby body dies at birth, the person with-in that body, the very limited thoughts (if any) and feelings, the 'person/ality', the reality of that person will have influenced the persons who were the parents who then would influence other beings.

A human body also does not "die" in the context of it going somewhere else also. Every body, like all matter, just changes in shape and form but still remains HERE in this one and only Life. After a human body 'dies', stops breathing, it just starts decaying and continually re-forms back into shape with ALL other matter. Earth to earth, as they say. Or, if a non-breathing human body is burnt, then it just returns to ashes. Ashes with then are nutrients for a (mother) earth that then provides for human beings in order so that they can keep procreating and propagating, that is of course until human beings destroy their one at only home, at the moment.

By the way we say 'we' grow old but the truth is the human body may appear to grow old, and then start decaying after it stops breathing and pumping blood but it really is just matter changing in shape and form. Another new thing to look at is 'we' the person inside never grow older. We always become newer. Every day, every hour, every minute and even every second we are always continually changing. The thoughts and feelings are always changing. Thoughts, in fact, always be-come anew, and therefore 'we' are always becoming new/er. Not old/er. That is while the body is still living anyway. After the body dies 'we' just remain, HERE, as memories. And, what we have invented, created and/or caused can be seen in what 'we' have had in/fluence upon in the environment.

'We', collectively, however is not the thought (knowledge) but is the one agreed upon knowing (knowledge).This 'knowing', like thoughts and feelings is invisible and non-physical, and although it could be argued is also held with-in the brain, 'knowing' is seen and known from the Mind. The Mind, unlike the brain, is invisible and non-physical, which where it is we can not actually put our "finger" on. The Mind, however, is NOT just in one physical human body and different within other physical bodies like thoughts and feelings are. There is only One Mind, like Life, It Self, which exists in ALL physical human bodies. "When we put the Mind to it we can do anything". "When we put the Mind to it we can learn anything". If we use the open Mind we can and do dream up of anything, and then we can learn how to make it anything. The open Mind allows us to look back in the past as far as we can and allows us to see all the way into the future as far as we can, and anywhere in between. The brain only has a limited view either way, whereas, the Mind is infinite and eternal.

When we individually are able to see from another point of view, i.e., empathy, then that is also because the one Mind, which is with-in all bodies. If and when we individually are looking and can see an "answer", which is an answer that every individual could agree on and with, then we are at a level of 'knowing', which obviously could only be proven correct if and when every individual does agree. But being able to 'know' what "others" know can only be done through a truly open Mind. Anyway, 'We' collectively are the 'knowing' knowledge of right and wrong, that lives in this One and only Mind, which is unlike the 'thinking' knowledge that does not know right and wrong, that lives in the multitude of separate brains. After any body 'dies', 'We' collectively, also do NOT go anywhere else. 'We', the Mind, just exist right HERE and right NOW, always have and always will, forever and eternally.

So,

'we', small w, individually, do not go anywhere after the body dies. The invisible and non-physical thoughts and feelings held with-in the physical brain, which i call the soul, lives with-in a physical brain and just passes on or flows through those other brains that that soul comes into contact with, for as long as it does.

'We', collectively, also do not go anywhere after the body dies. The invisible and non-physical knowing held with-in the invisible and non-physical Mind, which i call the Spirit, lives with-in ALL physical things and can and does transcend through ALL physical things, eternally. 'Knowing' does not go anywhere. 'It' always just stays the same, right HERE

The problem with this is that it is that the memory other people have of you is not you.

I NEVER said it was 'you'. I will try again, a 'person' is the thoughts and feelings with-in a body. These thoughts (and feelings) get passed on into other bodies that they come in contact with. So, the actual memory with-in one body is the person, itself, from another body now living in this body. One person can NOT even get a memory of what they themselves saw, heard, smelt, felt, and tasted through their own body 100% correct let alone understand all of what another person experienced, i.e., saw, heard, smelt, felt, and tasted.

sthitapragya wrote: No one knows you the way you do.

'I' know 'you' better than you know 'you'.

For example 'you' can not answer the question 'Who am 'I'?, therefore you do not know who 'you', the 'i' in that body is, or even who 'I' am. Whereas 'I' can answer the question who 'i' am as well as who 'you' are?

Of course you are now thinking, "NO you don't".

The Truth is I have actually even wrote who 'you' are down in the quote above. Can you find it?

Even if you could you still want to prove me wrong so here is your chance go ahead write down an answer the question, 'Who am 'I', really?"

That way 'you' can prove to ALL the readers that really 'you' do know who 'you' are better than 'I' know 'you'.

sthitapragya wrote: What other people know of you is just their subjective opinion of you. The memory they carry is their interpretation of you.

Which, if and when our discussions are looked at thoroughly the prove of how one person can so WRONGLY misinterpret another even in current discussion let alone in a past memory of them. So, YES you are totally right people's subjective opinions and views can and do have devastating effects on interpreting who others actually are.

sthitapragya wrote:The work you do or the influence you have on other people is also not you.

I NEVER said it was.

sthitapragya wrote:A person is much more than his or her achievements or other people's memories of them.

A 'person' is just a set of thoughts and emotional feelings with-in a human body. But this all depends on how much 'person/ality' we want to give to other bodies like dogs and cats for example also. A person therefore can be "with-in" other bodies besides just human bodies.

sthitapragya wrote:We don't know if the guy who invented the wheel had a sense of humor or not. Maybe he invented the wheel in a day and that became his legacy. He could have been an accomplished musician of his time, or a great mathematician whose work got burned when his village got pillaged. The real him could have been the musician or the mathematician. What we know is he invented the wheel. That is one accomplishment in a whole life. We don't know what he struggled with and what he failed at. A person is far far far more than memories or achievements.

OK what is a 'person' if they are far far far more than memories or achievements?

sthitapragya wrote:No person can be summed up by the memories of them or their achievements alone.

In the scheme of changing this "world" and creating a truly peaceful "world" so that everyone can live in harmony, what a past 'person' has done or has not done, who really cares? Does it really matter how good a person can play an instrument or not or ANYTHING else for that matter?

And, if any person existing in a living body now or in the past wants or wanted to be known for what they have achieved or have not done, then they should think about letting go of that "egotistical" self. 'You', any person, are not going to live forever anyway, so WHY be so concerned about how you are perceived and what you can 'take' from life? Is 'your', any person's, whole existence taken up by trying to be better than another and get as much recognition as you can? If so, WHY?

sthitapragya wrote:So when one dies, one dies. Memories are just memories.

When 'one' "what" exactly dies? What are you talking about now? What is the 'one' now?

Be prepared because whatever answer you provide expect me to challenge you on it.

sthitapragya wrote:Achievements are just a legacy left behind till they become obsolete.

You really take what I am doing here way too personally. This is NOT about people and their achievements at all.

Even if one person let us say wrote a book that did create a truly peaceful existence forever more, thus could never become obsolete, then that is NOT because that person is/was better than another person but because of all the people before and present.

By the way if you read my post AGAIN you will come away with a different view of what I really wrote and NOT just what you thought I wrote.

This was NEVER about the memories of another person, but rather about how a person continues to live on, after the body decays, with-in the the 'thoughts', the person, of another living body. Can you spot the difference?

The trouble with words and language is that everyone has different pre-associations with what a word or phrase means. We can't just change the meaning of words for our purposes (such as "I" to represent the collective, and "you" to represent individuals of the collective) and expect people to integrate the differences so completely that it blocks out all other associations with those words and then people just sail on to new awareness.

Like you, Ken, I have put a lot of effort into my written communication in order to get my message across as clearly as possible. And I am more inclined to use words such as "collective" or "individual" rather than "I" and "you" because I don't want people getting tripped up over such things... and it also makes more sense to ME.

My impression is that people who can understand the concept of "I" and "you" in the way that you're using it, already know for themselves what you're talking about to some degree... and even they, like myself, aren't likely to suddenly adopt all that you "know" from the "mind", instead of what they "know" from the "mind". We just can't tell people how to be... what to think... what to see -- regardless of what perspective we think we have. We can, however, tell people what we see... in such a way that it simply shows "another possibility". Whether or not they want to use that doesn't matter.

In my experience, the most profound influence for inspiring "shifting" is in person. There is so much that goes on with energy that far surpasses spoken/written words. The look on someone's face and in their eyes speaks volumes. Something that comes across harsh or confusing on the computer screen... can be much clearer when you can see a smile or playful scowl, and feisty twinkle in the eye, and feel the love and oneness. Through that ONENESS, I think we remind each other, "Oh yes, HERE WE ARE! And look at all the manifestations of us. How fantastic! How sacred! Bless you and enjoy!"

For myself, my logic suggests this:
There is nothing else we must be.
There is nowhere else we must go.
We didn't "come here" in order to "go back" to something. (We never left.)
We can do whatever we want.
It's all energy.
There is no separation or distance or time.
For us, there is each moment, into which to dive and drink deeply... or thrash around with vigor.
We can't get this "wrong".
We didn't do anything wrong to be here, nor will we be punished by anyone for not doing this "experience" a particular way.
It is like a sacred dream... yet no more lasting and significant than a dream.

Realizing connection with all while we are here, and while we have these "senses" and "thoughts" is magnificent!!! And it is an extraordinary challenge... because our senses and thoughts can "mess with" all of it, and distort it, and be distracted from the magnificence. But that's OKAY! And it's okay if other people have that experience. We don't need to "save" or enlighten anyone. We CAN hope (if we want) to inspire while we stay attuned to our own dance through it... such that others may broaden their experience if they want. There's no need, however, to swap one dream for another. (Again, this is how things look from the perspective I can see. I do not need anyone to agree with this... and I do not think anyone is condemned for not agreeing with this. )

I know the kind of world that I THINK I would like to experience... and that's how I'm focused on vibrating... and perhaps those of similar vibrations will be drawn together. For me it is not about "directing" anything. What I saw "behind the curtain" is that EVERYTHING IS MAGNIFICENT JUST AS IT IS, and it's ALREADY CONNECTED AND UNIFIED -- any sign that it is not is an illusion! The view I saw from behind the curtain is that all is sweet and beautiful, and if we can recognize that while we're here, and bask in it, wonderful. If not... wonderful.

ken wrote:I can teach any person how to build and control a flying ship, which can and will travel in time, if a person wants to learn how to build and fly it.

Can you explain how you know this?

Hi Lacewing,

"ken wrote:
I can teach any person how to build and control a flying ship, which can and will travel in time, if a person wants to learn how to build and fly it."

"Can you explain how you know this?"

I don't know if this is what Ken is referring to. I caught an article about some sort of headgear that allows a person to control many drones at the same time. If I see it again, I I'll post it in.

PhilX

I NEVER said it was 'you'. I will try again, a 'person' is the thoughts and feelings with-in a body. These thoughts (and feelings) get passed on into other bodies that they come in contact with. So, the actual memory with-in one body is the person, itself, from another body now living in this body. [/quote]
The thoughts that get passed on are only the thoughts that the person is willing to share. What about personal thoughts that never get passed on? Even the thoughts that do get passed on are not the exact thoughts a person has. They are simply the interpretation made by the person to whom they are passed on. If you consider all the thoughts a person has, only a small percentage get passed on. The ones that get passed on cannot define the person in question because they are the receivers interpretation of the thought. A feeling can never get passed on. What I feel, I can never truly describe to anyone. Even if I can, a feeling is a feeling. It has to be felt. They are completely individual.

ken wrote:One person can NOT even get a memory of what they themselves saw, heard, smelt, felt, and tasted through their own body 100% correct let alone understand all of what another person experienced, i.e., saw, heard, smelt, felt, and tasted.

But that is exactly the point I am making. If a person does tell me his thoughts, I will not understand that person 100%. I will only make my own interpretation of what the other person said. I could get it completely wrong as seems to be happening so often between us. So in effect, just a few thoughts of yours, many of them wrongly interpreted by me, get transferred to me. That is not you. It is my interpretation of you.

sthitapragya wrote: No one knows you the way you do.

ken wrote:'I' know 'you' better than you know 'you'.

For example 'you' can not answer the question 'Who am 'I'?, therefore you do not know who 'you', the 'i' in that body is, or even who 'I' am. Whereas 'I' can answer the question who 'i' am as well as who 'you' are?

Of course you are now thinking, "NO you don't".

The Truth is I have actually even wrote who 'you' are down in the quote above. Can you find it?

Even if you could you still want to prove me wrong so here is your chance go ahead write down an answer the question, 'Who am 'I', really?"

That way 'you' can prove to ALL the readers that really 'you' do know who 'you' are better than 'I' know 'you'.

Okay. I do not know who I am. You claim to know me better than me. So prove it. And no I cannot find the quote where you wrote me down. Show me the quote and prove to me that you know me better than I know me.

ken wrote:A 'person' is just a set of thoughts and emotional feelings with-in a human body. But this all depends on how much 'person/ality' we want to give to other bodies like dogs and cats for example also. A person therefore can be "with-in" other bodies besides just human bodies.

But that is not the person. It is just the part he wants to share. A part of a personality is not a whole person. And you cannot transfer a part of your personality to anyone. You can only share thoughts. And those too can wrongly be interpreted. All that gets transfered are a few thoughts. The feelings cannot be transferred. The personality cannot be transferred.

ken wrote:OK what is a 'person' if they are far far far more than memories or achievements?

A person is ALL the thoughts and ALL the feelings he ever has.A person is every accomplishment and every failure from which he learns or does not learn. Past, present and future. A person is a being under construction. Someone that changes everyday. The only time he is complete is at the end of his life, whenever that is.

ken wrote: In the scheme of changing this "world" and creating a truly peaceful "world" so that everyone can live in harmony, what a past 'person' has done or has not done, who really cares? Does it really matter how good a person can play an instrument or not or ANYTHING else for that matter?

This is not about what you care. No one cares. But the discussion was about a person existing NOW even after his death. That was one of your basic premises. And a person is every thought and feeling, achievement and failure. You might not care what he did or what he did not do. He did. And if he was to exist now, all of it must survive today. If it does not, he does not exist today.

ken wrote:And, if any person existing in a living body now or in the past wants or wanted to be known for what they have achieved or have not done, then they should think about letting go of that "egotistical" self.

That is not what I meant. What a person should let go off and hang on to are not the issue. What a person actually is is the issue. A person should let go of his ego. I agree totally. But for a person to exist now after his death, he should exist in totality because that is what a person is. That is all I am talking about.

ken wrote: 'You', any person, are not going to live forever anyway, so WHY be so concerned about how you are perceived and what you can 'take' from life? Is 'your', any person's, whole existence taken up by trying to be better than another and get as much recognition as you can? If so, WHY?

I am not at all concerned about how I am perceived. But for the purpose of existing after I die, all my thoughts and feelings must survive in totality after I die. Otherwise I die. I don't exist after that. Just a few memories of me created by other people survive.

So I cannot exist after I die. That is the point I am trying to make. There is no existence in the NOW after people die.

ken wrote:

sthitapragya wrote:So when one dies, one dies. Memories are just memories.

When 'one' "what" exactly dies? What are you talking about now? What is the 'one' now?

When a person dies, that person dies. He does not exist after his death as you claim. That is the point I am making.

ken wrote:You really take what I am doing here way too personally. This is NOT about people and their achievements at all.

I think you misunderstand me as much as I misunderstand you. Let me explain which quote of yours I am talking about.

You said: "The person who thought up and invented the wheel for example is in a way still existing or living with us today through that creation. If and when thinking about a wheel or any thing that is in relation to a wheel, then that is "them", the prior thinking, still alive today in "us", the current thinking. "

The wheel was the person's achievement. The achievement is alive today. The thinking is not. We do not know by what thought process he invented the wheel. What he thought of first and how it led to the wheel. We just know he achieved the invention of the wheel. His thinking is not alive. His achievement is alive. If we know the exact thought process that led him to the invention, we would know his thinking. But we don't have that. So his thinking is not alive today.

ken wrote:By the way if you read my post AGAIN you will come away with a different view of what I really wrote and NOT just what you thought I wrote.

Ditto.

ken wrote:This was NEVER about the memories of another person, but rather about how a person continues to live on, after the body decays, with-in the the 'thoughts', the person, of another living body. Can you spot the difference?

You said:"For example if the body walker's grandparents were in have both 'died', i.e., stopped breathing and pumping blood,then all those memories 'you' have (and are) which they instilled in you are actually keeping them alive and living with you. "

I am simply challenging your statement by saying memories of A created by B cannot keep A alive and living with B. A is not just the memories in B's mind. A is ALL A's own thoughts and feelings till the time of A's death. B's memories of A are hardly a fragment of what A truly was. A is dead. What B carries with B are just memories of A. Not A.