Philosophy Now Forum

It is true that reality does not ask to be understood but human beings still try to because they want to and because they can
They are simply engaging in an activity that they are capable of just like any other organism does what it is capable of also

One can say that reality is unchanging in the sense that it is all that has existed and will ever exist as well
But there is perpetual change occurring within it all the time for everything is always in a state of motion

Yes, sure, agree

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Jan 22, 2020 10:15 am

Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 22, 2020 2:29 amIf you want to appear as though you know what you are talking about, then please refrain from describing and explaining things in and with words.

Listen, you seriously need to refrain from telling other people how to think.

Are you serious here?

You are telling us that we can NOT explain 'this' in, with, by, and through, words. So, you are the one telling "other" people how to think.

One could also easily say to you now; 'Listen, you seriously need to refrain from telling other people how to think.

In other words, STOP telling us that we can not do some thing. Do you even understand what you are doing?

What you say can NOT be explained, I KNOW can be explained.

You can, honestly, say that 'you' do NOT know how to explain 'this', but you seriously need to refrain from telling 'me/us' that we can not explain 'this', especially when I KNOW how to explain 'this' very simply and very easily.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Jan 22, 2020 10:15 am When I use words to talk about a subject that I know to be implicitly and ultimately tacit ...ABSENT of any mad-made story or concept imposed upon it. Then believe me when I say to you I really do know what I am talking about because I have had personal DIRECT EXPERIENCE of what I am talking about.

I have NEVER once disputed that you know what you are talking about. I have in fact even agreed with you that you know what you are talking about. I have even offered a hand to help you explain 'this', what you say can not be explained. So, I KNOW what you are saying and talking about.

Also, remember I do NOT believe any thing at all, so I am NOT going to just start now believing you and what you say here. I prefer to just remain OPEN always.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Jan 22, 2020 10:15 am And yes ironically words are all I've got to talk about what I know to be tacit. What else am I supposed to use on a public forum to talk about this subject...would you prefer I use 'jellybeans' ?

Now you are just being totally ridiculous asking me this.

All I was doing was highlighting and showing the contradiction and hypocrisy of saying that 'this' can not be explained, with words, when at the exact same time you are trying to say and explain what 'this' is, with words.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Jan 22, 2020 10:15 am I also use words to convey a silent knowledge and understanding, and this comprehension is unique to the character 'dontaskme'.

Yes of course you use words to convey what is unique to the 'you', or to the character known as "dontaskme". That is the very essence of what I am saying. You are saying that 'this' can not be conveyed in words, yet, you use words to convey a message about "a silent knowledge and understanding. Why?

You also expressing that "others" can NOT explain what 'this' is, with the words that they use, to convey what is unique to 'them', is 'you' 'trying to' tell "others" what they can not do, as well as telling them how they should think.

For example, telling me that I can not do, what you yourself can not do, is telling me, that I can not do some thing, which I know I can do.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Jan 22, 2020 10:15 am In regards to what I understand or don't understand. I KNOW WHAT I KNOW and nothing you say in opposition to what I know will change that.

I have NEVER once said you do NOT know what you know. For example, I KNOW 100% that YOU can NOT explain 'this', with words. You have PROVEN this over and over, time and time again. This I have NEVER disputed. All I have disputed is you telling 'me' and "others" that we also can not do what you obviously can not do.

See, I KNOW you can not honestly tell me that I can not explain 'this'. This is because I actually do KNOW HOW TO DO IT, and I KNOW I CAN DO IT. So, you can keep telling me that I can not do some thing, but I have asked you to stop doing it.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Jan 22, 2020 10:15 am And yes I already understand the contradictive nature of langauge and it's dual nature when talking about the tacit nature of nondual reality, so stop with the constant lecturing and patronising people with your relentless condecending put downs of other peoples opinions.

Instead of just telling me to stop doing some thing, which I SEE you are completely mistaken off, how about you provide examples of what it is that you think I am "lecturing" about and "patronizing" people about exactly?

All I have really pointed to here, in regards to what 'you' and "alexw" continually do here, is you both say that some 'thing' can not be explained with and through words, and that I know that this is NOT true. So, I could say, so stop with the constant lecturing about the most negative connotations about not being able to do some thing, especially when what you are saying is NOT true nor correct at all.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Jan 22, 2020 10:15 am If you don't agree or like what I talk about then don't get involved, leave it, or reject it, it's your choice.

STOP telling me that I can not do some thing, which I KNOW I CAN, and I STOP disagreeing with you, and STOP pointing out that what you believe is true is NOT true at all.

Know and respect the fact that I don't resonate with any of your counter arguments to my ideas.[/quote]

You REALLY have NO idea what I have actually been saying and meaning, do you?

Know and respect the fact that I do NOT agree with your idea that I can NOT do some thing.

Know and respect the fact that I do TOTALLY agree with your idea that 'YOU' can NOT do some thing.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Jan 22, 2020 10:15 amAnd that communicating with you, for me, is like being trapped inside a washing machine where the flow of conversation can be compared to a jumbled mixed up mess where my head feels like it is spinning out of control. I simply don't want to engage in such discussions.

Then take your OWN advice; then don't get involved, leave it, or reject it, it's your choice.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Jan 22, 2020 10:15 amWhen are you going to accept that people have their own opinions and see that no two people ever see reality in the exact same way, nor will they ever express their seeing via their story in a way that EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS collectively

What is 'it' EXACTLY that you think I have been saying, and meaning here?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Jan 22, 2020 10:15 am..which is what you BELIEVE can be possible.

When are you going to accept that I do NOT believe any thing?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Jan 22, 2020 10:15 amWell allow me to disagree with you on that belief. This is what you fail to understand due to your ignorance which is seen by nearly every poster on this forum except you yourself.

Can you find a quote of mine where I have even alluded that people do not have their own opinions, let alone said it?

Can you find a quote of mine where I have even alluded that two people see reality in the exact same way, let alone said it?

Can you find a quote of mine were I have even alluded that people will express their seeing via their story in a way that EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS, let alone said it?

Seriously, do you even know where you are getting these misconceptions and completely WRONG assumptions from exactly?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Jan 22, 2020 10:15 am Age, you will just have to accept that not every one on this forum sees reality in quite the same way as you do, you need to understand this and mind your own business, resisiting the temptation to force your own business on other nondual thinkers is a hard dicipline that you have yet to master.

.

Where did you get this obviously WRONG and ABSURD assumption from that I think or even imagined that every one on this forum sees reality the same way as I do? I thought I had already made it quite CLEAR that I look at and see things very differently from "other" people.

What is 'it' exactly that you think or believe that I am "forcing" onto "others"?

What is 'it' exactly that you think or believe is "my own business" EXACTLY?

If you do NOT clarify these questions I ask you to, then this just more PRIME EXAMPLES of people thinking and believing things, from their own personal assumptions, which are based on their own previous experiences. What these people, in the days of when this is written, really do see and believe things that are NOT even there in Truth, nor Reality.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 2:17 am

Age wrote:

surreptitious57 wrote:

I do not think that a non biological entity can be said to have a purpose

And what evidence do you have that the Universe is not a biological entity ?

Is the earth to you a biological entity ?

Most of the Universe is empty space which is non biological

Remember you said, 'Most of the Universe is empty space', okay? This will come in handy later on, in discussions with you.

Most of the human body is torso, but this is NOT what the human body IS.

Most of the Universe is 'empty space', but this is NOT what the Universe IS.

Most of the human being is seen as human body, which is non thinking, but the human being can be seen as a thinking being.

The Universe, Itself, can be seen as a biological entity, no matter what most of It is seen as.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 2:17 am No the Earth is not a biological entity as such although it does contain life forms

What exactly are life forms, to you?

Is the earth, itself, really not alive, to you?

For a person who claims that their purpose is to acquire as much knowledge as they can, they also appear very firmly fixed on their current knowledge as being what is true, right, and correct, and not really that curious to gain more or newer knowledge instead.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 2:29 am

Age wrote:
Is there actual evidence that PROVES with I00 % certainty that there is :

I cosmic expansion at the local boundary ?

2 cosmic expansion beyond the local boundary ?

3 Is the local boundary or even beyond that actually the Universe Itself ?

I Yes there is evidence of local cosmic expansion

But not at the so called "boundary" correct?

Also, what evidence is that exactly?

If you say "red shift", then that so called "evidence" can be easily be put into question.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 2:29 am2 No there is no evidence for the non observable Universe

Okay.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 2:29 am3 Yes local cosmic expansion is definitely a part of the Universe

Okay, but this appearance is NOT the whole Universe, Itself, or is it?

Age wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:00 am

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Jan 22, 2020 10:15 am

Age wrote: ↑Wed Jan 22, 2020 2:29 amIf you want to appear as though you know what you are talking about, then please refrain from describing and explaining things in and with words.

Listen, you seriously need to refrain from telling other people how to think.

Are you serious here?

You are telling us that we can NOT explain 'this' in, with, by, and through, words. So, you are the one telling "other" people how to think.

Yes I'm serious.

And NO .. I am not telling you personally or anyone else that you cannot explain this using words. I am talking about WORDS in and of themselves in general can never be what they are pointing to in the same context a SIGNPOST is not the destination. Ironically words are used in this message. This has been explained to you many times, but you never seem to listen to what the message is saying, always preferring to butt into what's being said with your very boring predictable constant innuendo's. If you want to take everything spoken here personally then there is nothing I can do about that.

What I am telling you is to stop telling other people how to think by demanding they refrain from doing what they do in the only way they know how. All you do is take everything that is spoken here out of it's original context that it was meant to signify and then turn it into one big entangled mess that no one understands and is why many people stop communicating with you. Then once you have spewed out your innuendo's you then sit back and watch the other person try to untangle what is your mess. This addictive mental masturbation activity of yours is a waste of time, it is an insult to other peoples intelligence, and it's exausting and totally unnecessary. And still you continue because you never listen when it is being pointed out to you because you are only ever concerned with your own voice.

.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 3:06 am Reality is non dual in the sense that it is eternal and infinite and all points within it are interconnected
Brains are a part of it but they sometimes perceive themselves as being separate from it which is false

Brains perceiving themselves as being separate from the ALL-THERE-IS is not "false" in the truest of sense. Brains 'actually' do this, but it is just from the conceptual sense. Brains, literally, have to separate things into separate compartments, and take measurements, to be able to work things, and makes sense of the "world", or more correctly the Universe, around them.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 3:06 am Something that is within something cannot be separate from it but first person subjective perspective can fool brains into thinking otherwise

Yes brains can, and do quite frequently, fool them self's into thinking and believing things that really are NOT true at all, exactly like you have just pointed out here.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 3:06 am But from a Gods Eye perspective looking at reality from the outside everything including brains is a part of reality with nothing being separate

A 'God's Eye perspective' is not really looking at so called "reality" from the "outside", but rather looking at 'things' from 'Everything's perspective', instead. This is HOW a Truly objective perspective of things is gained, and comes from.

'Reality' is just a subjective conception, which its absolute or objective truth just needs to be discussed, and agree upon.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 3:06 am When the finger is pointing at the moon it is important to remember that both of them are a part of reality not just the moon

Great point, and well picked up on and noticed.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 3:06 amThe finger may be language which is a conceptual framework for explaining reality but language itself is also a part of reality

And because language is a 'part of' ALL-THERE-IS, and it is through the evolved human being that language has come about, then through continual evolution, Awareness, Itself, will be able to be able to Self-recognized, and thus Self-actuated, and therefore will, literally, be Self-explained.

ALL-THERE-IS is always evolving, so that means that one day even language will also evolve enough to, literally, BE Self-explanatory.

The Universe, or Awareness, Itself is NOT that stupid to be this Truly amazingly intricate, wise, and beautiful to just stop evolving at some point where language is contradictory and leaves Its creators confused and bewildered. The 'ever-present Awareness' is able to just so very simply, very easily, and just so very eloquently explain Its own Self, or ALL-THERE-IS, to absolutely ANY one who is Truly OPEN to listening, AND hearing.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 3:06 amAll concepts occurring within brains are a part of reality including the false concept that reality only exists outside brains
Reality is both inside and outside brains just as it is both inside and outside all physical objects and organisms in existence

The reality that brains perceive is not absolute because sense perception is very limited but brains however can understand it conceptually
As I have already mentioned it has three main characteristics - it is all there is / it is eternal and infinite / it is in a perpetual state of change
This is what it is at a fundamental level but brains cannot fully understand how it all functions because absolute knowledge is just not possible

This is just ANOTHER misconception, which brains make. See, brains can only look at and see things from what information/knowledge is already within them. So, like a lot of things brains fool them self's into thinking and believing things, which are just NOT true at all.

Learning and understanding HOW 'IT-ALL-FUNCTIONS' is just a 'work-in-progress'. Like absolutely ALL learning and understanding is just a 'work-in-progress'.

From what I have observed here 'you' are learning and understanding more and more all the time, from since I first read your posts.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 3:06 amSo while brains can experience reality they can never truly know it no more than anything can and so this is a fundamental truth to be learned

But, to me, this is an absolutely WRONG perception of ALL-THERE-IS, Truth, or 'Reality'.

This is just ANOTHER brain thinking "I have not yet learned how to do some thing, therefore no one else can learn it".

Although brains obtain knowledge from what the experiences, which becomes thoughts, so brain literally THINK things, instead of KNOW things, the way to KNOW, and Truly KNOW is through the completely OPEN Mind. Once how the Mind and the brain actually work is KNOWN, then this will be and is completely Self-explanatory.

Age wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:00 am
If you do NOT clarify these questions I ask you to, then this just more PRIME EXAMPLES of people thinking and believing things, from their own personal assumptions, which are based on their own previous experiences. What these people, in the days of when this is written, really do see and believe things that are NOT even there in Truth, nor Reality.

Let me remind you that what is being discussed here is the WHO or WHAT is the personally assumed thing that BELIEVES/ THINKS/ AND SPEAKS ????

Let me remind you that QUESTIONS can only arise in THE BELIEF that there is separate seeking entity wanting an answer to clarify it's own question. Just let me remind you that this statement I have just made is born out of A BELIEF STRUCTURE that there is personal self. Without that belief structure in place, the whole statement wouldn't even arise...do you not see that?

And that is what is being discussed here in this thread and many more of Dontaskme's threads. And yes, these subjects are talked about using words, and those words are being used to inform the BELIEVER that those words are only ever pointing to the illusory nature of reality in that words are dual by nature and only serve as a form of information which INFORMS the illusory nature of the words reality.

Got it? someone like you has already proved to this forum that you have difficulty with what clarification actually means because you are constantly asking and seeking for clarification from other people when you have already stated that YOU KNOW ALL THIS... and is why our conversations are always so tense and in opposition. Let me remind you that when the BELIEF STRUCTURE that is the MIND is KNOWN for what it really is and is not...then the CLARITY that you seek reveals itself quite effortlessly. It's really none of your business to expect to find clarity in other peoples interpretations of what and who is SELF..you will not FIND CLARITY in other peoples clarity because by the very act of asking for clarity IN OTHERS means you will be absorbing what can only be heresay second hand knowledge which will never be the clarity of your OWN DIRECT EXPERIENCE.

If you cannot comprehend what is being pointed out to you HERE, and continue on with your finger nails down a chalk board responses then our conversation will never flow harmoniously as this has been completely self-evidently the case throughout all of our conversations.

.

Age wrote:
Most of the Universe is empty space but this is NOT what the Universe IS

The Universe Itself can be seen as a biological entity no matter what most of It is seen as

I think the Universe is a physical entity with some biological life within it but is not biological as such
I therefore do not agree with your statement that it can be seen as a biological entity though you do

Age wrote:
What exactly are life forms to you ?

Is the earth itself really not alive to you ?

Life forms to me are biological entities such as plants and animals
The Earth can be said to be alive in either a metaphorical or a biological sense
But only actual life forms can be regarded as being alive in the biological sense

Age wrote:
For a person who claims that their purpose is to acquire as much knowledge as they can they also appear very firmly fixed on
their current knowledge as being what is true right and correct and not really that curious to gain more or newer knowledge

A completely false statement because I am acquiring new knowledge all of the time
I am very curious to gain as much as possible as that is my goal in life as I have said

But what new knowledge do you think I am not that curious about ?
And why would I not actually be interested in wanting to acquire it ?

AlexW wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 3:57 am

Age wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 2:43 am By the way, so you are AWARE of this also, 'thoughts', themselves, are the LAST THING I listen to or follow. I rely on KNOWING and NOT on THINKING.

Interesting... can you please let me know your definition of KNOWING vs THINKING?

'Thinking' comes from, or is a part of a, brain. Whereas, 'knowing' comes from Awareness, or what I call the Mind.

AlexW wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 3:57 am What exactly is the difference? How do you rely on KNOWING - how does that exactly work?

The difference is 'thinking' comes from an individual brain, and is only a subjective view of things. 'Knowing' comes from the one and only Mind, and is an objective view of things, which comes from ALL.

How I rely on KNOWING, is by KNOWING that EVERY One could be in agreement. (I say 'could' because some people 'would' just disagree, for the sake of disagreeing.)

Awareness of ALL things is done through an OPEN Mind, and contrary to popular belief, there is only One Mind. When we are able to look at and see things, from the perspective of thee One Truly OPEN Mind, then we can put our self into ALL things, and when looking and seeing things from the perspective of Everything as One (knowing), instead of looking and seeing from the perspective of one (thinking) person only, then this is how it works exactly.

For example, when any thing is thought to be true or right, then just look and see if ALL could agree with it. If not ALL could agree, then, whatever it is, has just come from your own past experiences, and not what is necessarily true or right.

What IS thee actual Truth of things, is what absolutely EVERY one agrees with, and, what is actually right in Life, is what absolutely EVERY one agrees with, and is needed.

What is right in Life, or what is alright behavior, is what is right by ALL, and, what is true in Life, or what is thee Truth, is what is in agreement by ALL.

For example, is it alright to drive to work to make money?

Most adults on the planet 'think' this is an alright behavior. Some would even insist that this is the right thing to do. This is because to some they think or believe we need money to live.

But if we want to look at this, and investigate, then, Do we need money to live? Although most adults, and older children think or believe we do, but from the perspective of Everything the obvious answer is of course 'we', human beings, do NOT need money to live. So, do we all think or believe we do? This is because from very young we were continually being taught we 'need' money to live. But the actual (or absolute, if you like) Truth IS, we do NOT need money to live.

So, why do 'we', adults/older children, go to work, especially when the majority of us HATE IT? This, again, is because we have some sort of belief that we 'have to' or 'need' to, which is the brain, through the belief-system, completely fooling ourselves that we 'have to' do some thing, which obviously we do not really 'need' to. So, WHY do we do 'that', what we particularly HATE so much, like we are being controlled by 'some thing'? This is because we are ALL greedy. 'Greed' just being WANTING MORE than we really NEED. 'Need', being what is 'necessary' to live. We, adults/older children, ALL want more than we 'need'. This is because as young children we continually heard our parents saying, "We 'need' a new this, or we 'need' a new that. We have grown up BELIEVING we 'need' things that we really do NOT 'need' at all. And, because ALL adults are so GREEDY, they invent things that we actually do NOT need at all, but they will spend billions of dollars on devising new ways to trick and fool us into BELIEVING that we do. Just the amount of money spend on the completely unnecessary ploy of 'marketing', to sell us "stuff" we Truly do NOT 'need', could probably prevent half the starving and health problems the whole world over.

Is it alright to drive to work? If the earth is surrounded or encapsulated by a "barrier" that more or less keeps the atmosphere enclosed, then if the pollution that comes out the exhaust pipe of a car can not just exist this atmosphere absolutely extremely easily and simply without any hindrance, then this would have to one day get to a tipping point where there is just to much pollution in the atmosphere for us to just keep living. If any one 'tries to' "justify" that this is okay in any way, shape, or form, even if the pollution could just freely escape the earth's atmosphere, we are still unnecessarily polluting the actual AIR we NEED to KEEP LIVING. And, if any one at all just 'tries to' suggest that this kind of polluting is okay or all right behavior, then put them in a closed in environment, like a room, which is like our atmosphere is, put the end of an exhaust pips into that "atmosphere" of that enclosed room, and see just how long it is before they realize just how important it really is to NOT pollute the actual AIR we ALL actually NEED, that is; IF we WANT to KEEP ON LIVING.

Besides these things, there are other reasons WHY it is NOT alright to drive to work to make money. Like young children do NOT want to be neglected, feeling rejected, because their parents (their Gods) have abandoned them, to go off and do other things like "make money". Young children do NOT want money, they much prefer to just be enjoying life with the people who love them most. Also, ALL children just want to have FUN, and 'love to have FUN', with their parents, than to 'have money', but obviously children learn VERY QUICKLY, and obtain, 'the love of money' instead. They replace the feeling of 'being loved' with the 'love of money', instead.

So, is it alright to drive to work to make money?

Of course, individually, just about ALL adults would, at first, say "Yes". But if we look at this and asked could ALL agree? Then the answer is 'No'. Now, If NOT ALL agree, then because I answer "Yes, it is alright to drive to work to make money", is just my individual perspective of things, even though just about ALL might agree with me, so this means that it literally is actually NOT alright behavior. If, literally, some 'thing' is NOT all right by ALL, then it is NOT an all right behavior. How do I KNOW some 'thing' is NOT all right by ALL is by just looking at things in a Truly OPEN and Honest way.

Obviously when looking at this question from, and through, a Truly OPEN Mind, then it is NOT all right to pollute the air we need to live. It is NOT all right to work, as much time as we do. And, we do NOT need money in order to keep living, so it is NOT all right to keep "making" or "chasing" money. Money after all is NOT even a necessity of Life. But, just as obvious, is that when looking at this question from, and through, an a brain that has already experienced things, thus has already been contaminated, or influenced to look at and seeing things in a very specific particular way already, then it is NOT just perfectly all right to drive to work to make money but it is also perfectly normal to do this, and it is even such the "right thing to do" we look down on those who do not go to work to make money. We actually use what we ALL KNOW is the RIGHT thing to do, and that is to contribute, by "working", to making the community better, for ALL, but we replace this KNOWING with the RIGHT THING, and use it to 'try to' "justify" to ourselves that our own personal greedy behavior, which obviously is NOT for the ALL, but only for a select few, is the "right thing", and that "others" who are NOT "contributing to society" like we like to think and believe we are, are "lessor" than us. By driving to work to make money, to spend on us individually, and a very few select "others" is in NO WAY contributing to making a better society for ALL.

'Thinking' (and believing) we are doing what is right in Life, can be the exact opposite of what is actually the right thing to do in Life, which is discovered when one KNOWS how to distinguish between what 'thinks' is right from what they KNOW is actually the right thing to do in Life.

KNOWING comes from the Mind, which is ALWAYS OPEN, which EVERY One shares, and which where Awareness comes from and is Awareness, Itself. Whereas, 'thinking' comes from an individual brain, which has completely and utterly influenced from and by past experiences. Obviously, unless a person has experienced a perfect life or a life in True peace and harmony, then they can NOT think about this way of life, nor even expect that it could become a reality, from and through the brain. There is just absolutely no input in the brain about this, other than the usual, "that is just NOT possible". But, from and through thee Truly OPEN Mind, absolutely ANY thing is POSSIBLE. Human history, and what human beings have imagined, devised up, invented, AND created is ALL the evidence needed that human beings can make absolutely ANY thing possible.

AlexW wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 3:57 am

Age wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 2:43 am The 'eternal Tao', the 'eternal name', the 'nameless', is just the Universe, Itself, in the physical visible sense, AND, the Mind, Itself, in the Spiritual invisible sense.

Is this your explanation for "ALL-OF-THIS" ?

No.

AlexW wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 3:57 am If so, great, what an amazing feat! You used the words "Universe" and "Mind" and gave them attributes of "physical visible" and "Spiritual invisible"...
Now... how would that explanation help anyone?

'you' "alexw" may not have noticed but "others" may have. That is; Noticed just how quickly you made up an assumption/assumed some thing AND believed that your own assumption is True and Right.

That is CERTAINLY NOT my explanation for ALL-OF-THIS. WHY would you even begin to ASSUME such a ridiculous thing, let alone start believing that it is true, and then start answering your own questions, and then proposing your next questions on your own already jumped to conclusion, which is so OBVIOUSLY WRONG, from the very start.

To explain E=MC2 could have taken hundreds of thousands of words to 'explain', but the conclusion is a very simple five symbols.

I am NOT yet sure how many words I will need to explain what it is that I am wanting to explain, but at the end of that explain it to will also come down to a very simple and very easily understood few words, which are made up of just very few very simple symbols also, like the three letters 'G', "O', and 'D'.

AlexW wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 3:57 am All I can see is that it will confuse people and make them believe that there is some tangible thing called "universe" and another one called "mind" - a physical thing versus an invisible thing... But hey, if you like your own explanation that's great - keep believing in it!
As long as I don't have to, its fine with me.

OF COURSE you do NOT have to 'believe' it. In fact I do NOT even 'believe' it. So, I absolutely do NOT even want 'you' to 'believe' it, nor absolutely ANY thing else I say or explain. I also, contrary to your belief again, do NOT even want you nor any one "else" to even accept nor agree with absolutely ANY thing I say. I ONLY would like 'you' and "others" to agree with and accept only 'that' what makes sense to 'you' and 'them'.

If absolutely ANY thing I say does not make sense to you, then that is better than GREAT, because if you then HIGHLIGHT the actual words I said that do not make sense to you, and then you EXPLAIN HOW and WHY they do NOT make sense to you, then either I will learn WHY what I said is WRONG, or I will learn ANOTHER WAY to EXPLAIN that BETTER. So, the MORE you can SHOW me of what I say is WRONG, and most importantly WHY it is WRONG, then the far BETTER that is for ME.

See, contrary to your belief again, NOTHING of what I say I am proposing is true, right, and correct. I am just wanting to learn HOW to express what is actually True, Right, and Correct. And, I can NOT do that without the help from people like 'you'. So, the more people I TURN OFF from what I write, then the MORE they will JUDGE what I write, then the MORE they will critique my writings, and the MORE they will POINT OUT and SHOW is FALSE, WRONG, and INCORRECT, and then the MORE I can and will LEARN. Thus, accomplishing the goal I set out to do, in this forum.

So, PLEASE critique what I say as much as you can, the more mistakes that you point out to the readers I make, and explain HOW and WHY they are mistakes, then the better it is for both of us.

AlexW wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 6:08 am

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 5:51 am Reality has parts to it but only human beings with their complex brains understand this

Can something that has no limits, no boundaries really have parts?

Yes, but only conceptually.

AlexW wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 6:08 am If it had parts then it would have to have an unlimited number of parts, right? Doesn't this render the idea of parts actually being real - of reality being made up of limited things - a toothless concept?

The ONLY WAY you can understand this is because 'you', thee conceptually thinking human being, is because you have conceptualized the One into parts. Otherwise 'you' could have NEVER come to and reached this conclusion. So, just maybe being able to look at and see the conceptual "different and separate parts" was for the very reason for you to be able to come to and reach the conclusion, 'you' have, which you are suggesting is more true, more right, and more correct than other concepts are.

Just maybe the reason 'you' are able to see, conceptually, "limited things" is so that the 'thing', which you suggest can not be explained in words, can actually eventually be explained in and by words, through language? Or, is this just NOT possible in your own separate and different conceptual view of things here?

AlexW wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 6:08 am

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 5:51 am This is because in order to understand it they have to break it up into manageable bits

Well.. but reality doesn't ask to be understood.

Where did 'we' come from?

What 'you' are calling "reality"?

Did a species conceptually known as 'human beings' evolve, with the ability to conceptualize?

If yes, then that is a part of "reality". So, "reality" maybe did not ask to be understood. But, "reality" may have created, through evolution, a conceptualizing, thinking animal species, so that 'It', thee True Reality could actually be understood, and recognized for what 'It' Truly IS?

AlexW wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 6:08 am Its only something we think (in our compartmental dream of a dualistic reality) is so important...

But WHO thinks this? And, who thinks this is "important"?

You seem to have a concept that because SOME people think a certain way then just about EVERY one thinks that way also.

If you stopped using words like 'we' as though that implies ALL-OF-US, and instead used words to those that you actually perceive to think that way instead, then I might also stop showing and pointing out the WRONG I see in your writings. Stick to the actual Truth and not some generalized truth, which you individually see is the truth of things.

AlexW wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 6:08 am

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 5:51 am Human beings thinking about reality is part of reality too because all concepts within brains occur within reality

To me, it is not part of reality - it is undivided reality itself.

Okay, then ABSOLUTELY EVERY thing that is said and written, under absolutely EVERY given name, is the undivided Reality, Itself, taking and speaking. Therefore, absolutely EVERY thing is in its PERFECT position. This then just comes down to either; Forever more in eternity Reality, Itself, will NEVER be able to find words nor a language to explain WHO and WHAT Its True Self IS, to Its Self, which is according to the version under the given names of "dontaskme" and "alexw". Or, Reality, Itself, is exactly in the PERFECT process of learning a way to divulge Its True Self, to Its Self, in words, through language, and as far as 'I' can SEE I KNOW what the outcome is, which is ALREADY CLEARLY COMING TO LIGHT.

AlexW wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 6:08 am Also, nothing occurs in reality, neither inside nor outside... there is no room for activity. This doesn't mean that we cannot perceive apparent constant change - actually all we perceive is constant change - but reality itself is not changing in the slightest.

This singular 'I' is just wondering HOW, under the name "alexw" there could be a 'we' in an UNDIVIDED Reality, Itself?

AlexW wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 6:08 am Let me try to explain it like this: Reality is like air - the same air can fill a square container as it can fill a round one - the air doesn't change, while the container seems to change... but the container is not real (there really is no container, there is only air appearing as a container), only the air is real... We though only see the container (the form, the concept, a thing) and believe it is actually real while actually the opposite is true - the "invisible" air is real and the form is just an "illusion".

But WHY does the writings under the name "alexw" keep BELIEVING firstly, that there is a 'we'? Secondly, WHO is this 'we' that is believed to ALL be seeing and doing these things that are proposed here? And thirdly, WHY under the name "alexw" this is being done?

Under the name "age" what gets proposed as 'we' ALL do under the name "alexw" does NOT get done at all.

I do NOT see the container (the form, the concept, a thing) and believe it it actually real at all. So, why does "reality" do this under the name "alexw"?

AlexW wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 6:08 am But we call this illusion existence, or life, we believe it has a start and an end, and countless steps in between... quite amazing

Who is this 'we' that "reality" keeps referring to here?

'I' ABSOLUTELY do NOT do such things here as being proposed.

WHY keep doing what is KNOWN to be NOT right and NOT correct?

AlexW wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 6:08 am

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 5:51 am This is true regardless of whether or not the concepts in question are true or false as they still exist either way

Yes, they exist, but they are not real.

Did the writings under "alexw" propose before that nothing is real or not real?

If yes, then WHY propose some things are real and/or not real now?

Also, do some things exist, while others do not exist?

And, are ALL concepts "not real"?

Because the written concepts under the label "alexw" are proposing those concepts are real. So, what is it that Reality is really saying and meaning here, EXACTLY?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:51 am

Age wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:00 am

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Jan 22, 2020 10:15 am

Listen, you seriously need to refrain from telling other people how to think.

Are you serious here?

You are telling us that we can NOT explain 'this' in, with, by, and through, words. So, you are the one telling "other" people how to think.

Yes I'm serious.

And NO .. I am not telling you personally or anyone else that you cannot explain this using words.

But 'you' ARE.

EVERY time you use the words, "WE' can not explain this using words", then you are telling us what we can NOT do, AND how to think. This is the main point of contention I have had with 'you' since from about the very outset.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:51 am I am talking about WORDS in and of themselves in general can never be what they are pointing to in the same context a SIGNPOST is not the destination.

Well I am going to disagree with 'you'. Words, in and of themselves, generally EVOLVE to be more specific and more "pointing" of WHERE and WHAT the actual "destination" IS, EXACTLY.

The WHOLE PURPOSE of WORDS is to BETTER UNDERSTAND.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:51 am Ironically words are used in this message. This has been explained to you many times, but you never seem to listen to what the message is saying,

Or, I already KNOW EXACTLY what the message IS SAYING, and/or it is actually 'you' who keeps misinterpreting what it is that I am SAYING and MEANING, which, by the way, I might be do intentionally, to you, for reasons not yet explained to you.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:51 am always preferring to butt into what's being said with your very boring predictable constant innuendo's. If you want to take everything spoken here personally then there is nothing I can do about that.

And, if you want to keep misconstruing, mistaking, misinterpreting, and/or misunderstanding what is actually being said and meant, then there is nothing that 'I' can do about that. Or, is there?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:51 am What I am telling you is to stop telling other people how to think by demanding they refrain from doing what they do in the only way they know how.

I have told you to refrain from telling other people that they can not do some things, which obviously they can, and so to stop telling people how to think also. By telling people that they can not do some things, then you are telling them to think that they can not do some things.

What is it that you think I am demanding you from refraining doing, other than to STOP telling people that they can not do some things?

If I CAN DO what you say I can NOT do, then I will tell you to refrain from telling me that I can NOT do some thing, which I already obviously KNOW I can.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:51 am All you do is take everything that is spoken here out of it's original context that it was meant to signify and then turn it into one big entangled mess that no one understands and is why many people stop communicating with you.

So, WHAT is your REASON for communicating with me now? Do you understand me now?

What I am writing now, is NOT necessarily for the people's of these times, when this is being written, for them to understand completely.

Will you provide some examples of where I have supposedly taken some thing out of its original context, and then turned it into "one big entangled mess that NO ONE understands?

Providing SOME examples of this should be rather very relative easy thing for you to do, considering I supposedly "take EVERYTHING that is spoken here out of its original context that it was meant to signify". So, let us see if you can show the READERS by providing just ONE example of this?

Once I have had a look at it, then I, and the readers, will KNOW what it is that you are actually referring to here.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:51 am Then once you have spewed out your innuendo's you then sit back and watch the other person try to untangle what is your mess. This addictive mental masturbation activity of yours is a waste of time, it is an insult to other peoples intelligence, and it's exausting and totally unnecessary.

This is certainly NOT exhausting nor totally unnecessary to me at all. But, then this is because I KNOW what the actual outcome is going to BE.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:51 am And still you continue because you never listen when it is being pointed out to you because you are only ever concerned with your own voice.

.

I must NOT be listening because I still do NOT know what "it" is EXACTLY that is supposedly being "pointed out to me". The only thing I KNOW so far is that from your perspective I "take everything that is spoken here out of it's original context that it was meant to signify and then turn it into one big entangled mess that no one understands".

So, until you provide at least ONE EXAMPLE, then I will still have absolutely NO clue nor idea what it is that is being "pointed out to me".

Let us readers SEE if you can actually point out a supposed "original context that it was meant to signify" by explaining what the supposed CONTEXT was MEANT to SIGNIFY, and then let us SEE just how much I turned "that" into "one big entangled mess that none of 'you' understand?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 11:25 am

Age wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:00 am
If you do NOT clarify these questions I ask you to, then this just more PRIME EXAMPLES of people thinking and believing things, from their own personal assumptions, which are based on their own previous experiences. What these people, in the days of when this is written, really do see and believe things that are NOT even there in Truth, nor Reality.

Let me remind you that what is being discussed here is the WHO or WHAT is the personally assumed thing that BELIEVES/ THINKS/ AND SPEAKS ????

But that is EXACTLY NOT what I am discussing here at all.

Depending on WHO and WHAT is being referred to, I discuss thee One that KNOWS, and, those ones who think they know.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 11:25 am Let me remind you that QUESTIONS can only arise in THE BELIEF that there is separate seeking entity wanting an answer to clarify it's own question.

This is NOT necessarily so at all. and this is absolutely FALSE, from the writings under the name "age". I am asking questions to see if the writings under "other" names speak from the person self or from thee True Self.

The writings, just like now, under the name "dontaskme" are obviously speaking from the personal little self, which only thinks it knows what is true, right and correct. Obviously the writings in the quote are NOT actually true, right, nor correct at all.

Just let me remind you that this statement I have just made is born out of A BELIEF STRUCTURE that there is personal self. Without that belief structure in place, the whole statement wouldn't even arise...do you not see that?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 11:25 am And that is what is being discussed here in this thread and many more of Dontaskme's threads. And yes, these subjects are talked about using words, and those words are being used to inform the BELIEVER that those words are only ever pointing to the illusory nature of reality in that words are dual by nature and only serve as a form of information which INFORMS the illusory nature of the words reality.

And the writings under the label "dontaskme" PROVE that what has been said and written countless times previously can not be understood or accepted.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 11:25 am Got it? someone like you has already proved to this forum that you have difficulty with what clarification actually means because you are constantly asking and seeking for clarification from other people when you have already stated that YOU KNOW ALL THIS...

Asking and seeking for clarification is ONE WAY to SEE how much is actually known and understood.

If things can not be clarified very simply, then really how much is actually really understood?

Also it is because of KNOWING ALL-OF-THIS I am able to ask the RIGHT clarifying questions, which are obviously NOT able to answered.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 11:25 am and is why our conversations are always so tense and in opposition.

But I am only in contention with the way you use words, and NOT in what you actually KNOW tacitly.

You just feel so tense and in opposition with 'me' because of the way you misinterpret what I write intentionally, or unintentionally?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 11:25 am Let me remind you that when the BELIEF STRUCTURE that is the MIND is KNOWN for what it really is and is not...then the CLARITY that you seek reveals itself quite effortlessly.

Okay great. This sounds truly exiting. So, please tell me more about this 'belief structure' and how 'it' works exactly. Then also please inform me more about this 'mind' thing and how 'it' works exactly and how the 'belief structure' is in relation to the 'mind'.

I am seriously very interested and excited to learn MORE, and this sounds like you really do know what you are talking about here. So, please explain more and in as much detail as necessary. Would you mind if I continued to ask you as many clarifying questions afterwards so that I can gain as much understanding about what it is that you are actually saying and meaning here?

Being able to SEE with CLARITY as much as I can all by myself and quite effortlessly sounds Truly amazing, and so I would love to KNOW MORE regarding this.

What is the best or first thing I could do to learn more about ALL-OF-THIS, thank you?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 11:25 am It's really none of your business to expect to find clarity in other peoples interpretations of what and who is SELF..

Have you STILL NOT WORKED OUT what is actually going on here?

Self is ALREADY KNOWN and UNDERSTOOD by 'Me'.

There is ONLY One True Self. But there are just as many conceptual ideas of 'self's' as there are, old enough, human bodies to conceptualize a 'self'.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 11:25 am you will not FIND CLARITY in other peoples clarity because by the very act of asking for clarity IN OTHERS means you will be absorbing what can only be heresay second hand knowledge which will never be the clarity of your OWN DIRECT EXPERIENCE.

Obtaining CLARITY of the 'thinking' in "other" bodies, is so that I can LEARN a BETTER WAY to relate to MORE people in a BETTER WAY.

I am NOT and NEVER have been asking for CLARITY so that I could better understand any thing else other than how to communicate BETTER. As I have already explained I ALREADY KNOW ALL-OF-THIS to EXPLAIN. I just NEED to LEARN how to COMMUNICATE ALL-OF-THIS in a much better way than I know how to now.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 11:25 am If you cannot comprehend what is being pointed out to you HERE, and continue on with your finger nails down a chalk board responses then our conversation will never flow harmoniously as this has been completely self-evidently the case throughout all of our conversations.

.

AND, maybe I have comprehended what it is that you have been pointing out all along, and really it is 'YOU' who has NOT fully comprehended what I have been saying and doing here, because you BELIEVE that 'I' can NOT know what it is that I say I ALREADY KNOW and UNDERSTAND. Could this be a possibility? Or, is this just NOT possible and it is solely because of 'me' and my inability to comprehend what it is that you have been pointing out?

To me, our conversations have been FLOWING PERFECTLY because this is HOW Awareness/Reality has been orchestrating ALL ALONG.

OBVIOUSLY, absolutely EVERY word that gets said and mentioned, literally in written words, is because this is EXACTLY what thee One Awareness/Reality/ever-present God is wanting AND doing. It is just using different labels to write under to SHOW the OPPOSITES of Life, as One, to It Self. So, that It is HERE NOW for ALL-AS-ONE to LOOK AT and SEE.