Philosophy Now Forum

Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 11:18 am

Fairy wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 11:15 am

Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 10:54 am Chasing your own tail's a lot of fun. But what happens when you catch it?

When you catch it, you realise you are both the catcher and the caught, catching itself.
This action is an automatic self-sustaining feedback L00P

I get dizzy on the Merry-go-round.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 10:13 am

Fairy wrote: ↑Sat Sep 07, 2024 6:23 pm What do you guys think about the idea that there is only ONE OF US HERE?


I’m being serious, if you think about it, there really is only one of us here.

The ancients knew this too, it’s not a new idea. So does this shock or offend you, or does it liberate or put you in a state of pure blessed relief?

Discuss.

It doesn't shock me, but as you've said it's been around and I've encountered it before.

How about there is one person here AND there are a number of people here. I don't think these need be mutually exclusive. And one could take both seriously.

There is no person. There is only here the nameless one without a second. The person is a concept known, that knows nothing.
The known person is secondary, it is thought known by the one and only.

Fairy wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 11:49 am

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 10:13 am

Fairy wrote: ↑Sat Sep 07, 2024 6:23 pm What do you guys think about the idea that there is only ONE OF US HERE?


I’m being serious, if you think about it, there really is only one of us here.

The ancients knew this too, it’s not a new idea. So does this shock or offend you, or does it liberate or put you in a state of pure blessed relief?

Discuss.

It doesn't shock me, but as you've said it's been around and I've encountered it before.

How about there is one person here AND there are a number of people here. I don't think these need be mutually exclusive. And one could take both seriously.

There is no person. There is only here the nameless one without a second. The person is a concept known, that knows nothing.
The known person is secondary, it is thought known by the one and only.

I guess I go for what works the most for me. Sometimes I can look at it as one. Sometimes there sure seem to be others, actually most of the time. I don't really have to pick a winner, so to speak. But I feel little urge to push this, just saying stuff from my perspective. Seems it is often as if we need to choose: choose all is one is THE real truth or No, it's obvious there are many, choose that. Me, I don't feel I have to choose.

Impenitent wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 10:29 am thoughts

-Imp

Thoughts yes, that have no exact location.

Is thought thinking? or is thinking thought? Where is the actual 'thinker' located exactly?

There is self-evidently an awareness of thought, there is a conscious recognition of thought. But where is consciousness, where is awareness, where is thought? To answer these thoughts, one must be able to see the invisible. What a cool trick, eh?

It's natural to feel isolated when contemplating such deep and abstract ideas, especially if you feel others around you aren't engaging with similar thoughts. However, we're not alone in these reflections. Many people have walked this path of questioning reality and consciousness.
Struggling with the depth of our insights, it's understandable that going deep into these thoughts can make one feel disoriented or even "crazy."
The nature of consciousness is elusive, and the more one tries to grasp it, the more it can feel like it's slipping away or becoming more complex.

And yet here consciousness is, as plain as the nose of your face, closer than your very own skin.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 12:26 pm

Fairy wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 11:49 am

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 10:13 am It doesn't shock me, but as you've said it's been around and I've encountered it before.

How about there is one person here AND there are a number of people here. I don't think these need be mutually exclusive. And one could take both seriously.

There is no person. There is only here the nameless one without a second. The person is a concept known, that knows nothing.
The known person is secondary, it is thought known by the one and only.

I guess I go for what works the most for me. Sometimes I can look at it as one. Sometimes there sure seem to be others, actually most of the time. I don't really have to pick a winner, so to speak. But I feel little urge to push this, just saying stuff from my perspective. Seems it is often as if we need to choose: choose all is one is THE real truth or No, it's obvious there are many, choose that. Me, I don't feel I have to choose.

As they say, you do you. What works for you. "This" is as innocent as a baby.

Every one is a winner, baby. Personally, I like to contemplate the duality, and not the non-duality strictly in terms of direct experience, as this pertains to the very thoughts shared and being inspected, and stands to reveal the true nondual nature to an even more subtle, deeper, fuller and satisfying extent.


The SELF is pure enlightenment. Enlightenment was born like this, it claims no judgement, no regret, no shame, no blame, no fame, no favouritism, no guilt. It's just a pure innocent baby. A baby could not have been born any different than it was. A baby could not have been born better.

This is just pure imperfect perfection. This is just meaningful meaningless perfection.

Everything you seek is waiting patiently within, for growing old is only going backwards to where you've been.

This is age-less, time-less, beautiful resting light. This is also unmoving, unknowing perfect brilliant stillness. This is All alone, all one appearing as the many infinite forms, infinitely for eternity. NOW

Q: What do you think?
A: Thoughts



ahaha

Fairy wrote: ↑Sat Sep 07, 2024 6:23 pm What do you guys think about the idea that there is only ONE OF US HERE?


I’m being serious, if you think about it, there really is only one of us here.

The ancients knew this too, it’s not a new idea. So does this shock or offend you, or does it liberate or put you in a state of pure blessed relief?

Discuss.

There are at least two: One is you who is aware of what you cause and another one is the one you become aware of what she/he/it causes.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 12:26 pm

Fairy wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 11:49 am

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 10:13 am It doesn't shock me, but as you've said it's been around and I've encountered it before.

How about there is one person here AND there are a number of people here. I don't think these need be mutually exclusive. And one could take both seriously.

There is no person. There is only here the nameless one without a second. The person is a concept known, that knows nothing.
The known person is secondary, it is thought known by the one and only.

I guess I go for what works the most for me. Sometimes I can look at it as one. Sometimes there sure seem to be others, actually most of the time. I don't really have to pick a winner, so to speak. But I feel little urge to push this, just saying stuff from my perspective. Seems it is often as if we need to choose: choose all is one is THE real truth or No, it's obvious there are many, choose that. Me, I don't feel I have to choose.

But, who and/or what is this 'One I', exactly, who, supposedly, does not feel that it has to choose?

If, and when, 'you' work out who 'I' am, exactly, then like "fairy" is saying here, 'you' will, literally, feel and see things differently.

Age wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 9:01 pm But, who and/or what is this 'One I', exactly, who, supposedly, does not feel that it has to choose?

If, and when, 'you' work out who 'I' am, exactly, then like "fairy" is saying here, 'you' will, literally, feel and see things differently.

But I know who you are, already. I've met you many times, and not just here at PN. Don't you remember?

Fairy wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 1:00 pm

Impenitent wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 10:29 am thoughts

-Imp

Thoughts yes, that have no exact location.

Except that thoughts occur within a human body, correct?

Fairy wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 1:00 pm Is thought thinking? or is thinking thought? Where is the actual 'thinker' located exactly?

It could be said, and argued here now, that it is the brain that thinks, or within the brain that thinking occurs.

In the 'olden days' it was said and claimed that it was 'you', the 'person', that thought, or did the thinking, but it is 'you', a person, a being, or a soul, who is, the invisible and individual, 'thoughts', themselves, within an individual human body.

The 'thinker', therefore, is the individual human brain, within a human body.

The 'Knower', however, is the Mind, Itself.

The Mind 'knows', whereas the brain 'thinks'.

And, how the Mind 'knows' what is irrefutably True, and Correct, is because of what the 'Mind', Itself, actually, really, is. As it will become clearer, and absolutely clear, and as 'we' move along here, this will all become, literally, Self-evident, and Self-proved.

Fairy wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 1:00 pm There is self-evidently an awareness of thought, there is a conscious recognition of thought. But where is consciousness, where is awareness, where is thought? To answer these thoughts, one must be able to see the invisible. What a cool trick, eh?

And, the One that is able to, and does, 'see', (when the word 'see' is meaning 'understands'), the 'invisible' is the very Thing that has 'the ability to' 'see', 'understand', learn, and 'know' all and every thing, that is; the Mind, Itself. Which is always completely OPEN. It is the 'One (always Truly OPEN) Mind' which is what is Conscious and Aware of absolutely every single thing, including "It" Self. This One is, always, Conscious and Aware of 'all things', which are only and just the, conceptual, 'parts' of the One and only Thing, the Universe, Itself.

Fairy wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 1:00 pm It's natural to feel isolated when contemplating such deep and abstract ideas, especially if you feel others around you aren't engaging with similar thoughts. However, we're not alone in these reflections. Many people have walked this path of questioning reality and consciousness.
Struggling with the depth of our insights, it's understandable that going deep into these thoughts can make one feel disoriented or even "crazy."
The nature of consciousness is elusive, and the more one tries to grasp it, the more it can feel like it's slipping away or becoming more complex.

But the nature of Consciousness is not elusive at all.

It is only the 'thoughts' and 'thinking' within 'that body' that is making 'that claims', which is an already proved False claim and assertion.

Fairy wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 1:00 pm And yet here consciousness is, as plain as the nose of your face, closer than your very own skin.

Fairy wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 1:21 pm Everything you seek is waiting patiently within, for growing old is only going backwards to where you've been.

This is age-less, time-less, beautiful resting light. This is also unmoving, unknowing perfect brilliant stillness. This is All alone, all one appearing as the many infinite forms, infinitely for eternity. NOW

Individual visible human bodies do not age, but just change in shape and form, even after those bodies have stopped breathing

Invidual invisible beings, within human bodies, also do not age, you and they become anew, or newer, instead. As human bodies change, as some say and call, 'over time, the invisible 'thoughts', within, are always becoming 'anew'. These individual invisible thoughts, within individual visible human bodies, are what the word 'you', the person, are, and referring to, exactly. 'you', nor the body, get 'old', nor age', 'we', the 'human beings' just change in way, shape, and form. Although 'we', people, do not die, 'we' are not 'age-less'. As 'we' only came-to-be, only after an individual human body was created, and while evolving.

The visible matter, however, which is what makes up all 'bodies' is 'age-less'.

bahman wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 4:26 pm

Fairy wrote: ↑Sat Sep 07, 2024 6:23 pm What do you guys think about the idea that there is only ONE OF US HERE?


I’m being serious, if you think about it, there really is only one of us here.

The ancients knew this too, it’s not a new idea. So does this shock or offend you, or does it liberate or put you in a state of pure blessed relief?

Discuss.

There are at least two: One is you who is aware of what you cause and another one is the one you become aware of what she/he/it causes.

This is, literally, self-refuting.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 9:21 pm

Age wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 9:01 pm But, who and/or what is this 'One I', exactly, who, supposedly, does not feel that it has to choose?

If, and when, 'you' work out who 'I' am, exactly, then like "fairy" is saying here, 'you' will, literally, feel and see things differently.

But I know who you are, already. I've met you many times, and not just here at PN. Don't you remember?

Once again, 'this one' has completely and utterly, absolutely, 'missed' and misunderstood what 'I' have said, and asked here.

And, once again, this is because 'this one' never considered to just seek out and obtain any 'clarification' at all, and instead just preferred to assume some 'thing', from which it then 'jumped to' the conclusion that it is true.

Age wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2024 1:35 am

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 9:21 pm

Age wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2024 9:01 pm But, who and/or what is this 'One I', exactly, who, supposedly, does not feel that it has to choose?

If, and when, 'you' work out who 'I' am, exactly, then like "fairy" is saying here, 'you' will, literally, feel and see things differently.

But I know who you are, already. I've met you many times, and not just here at PN. Don't you remember?

Once again, 'this one' has completely and utterly, absolutely, 'missed' and misunderstood what 'I' have said, and asked here.

And, once again, this is because 'this one' never considered to just seek out and obtain any 'clarification' at all, and instead just preferred to assume some 'thing', from which it then 'jumped to' the conclusion that it is true.

Again, what you said to me regarding my working out who you are, as if it is something that might happen in the future, is off. I already know (have worked out/recognize) who you are. Don't you remember all these times we have met? I do hope you're not unaware we've met many times before and long before Philosophy Now was a spark of an idea in Rick Lewis' head.