Philosophy Now Forum

Harbal wrote:Maybe I should make myself scarce till I'm in a better mood.

Or maybe you should let loose and curse a whole lot to make yourself feel better. It works for me.

Lacewing wrote:

Harbal wrote:Maybe I should make myself scarce till I'm in a better mood.

Or maybe you should let loose and curse a whole lot to make yourself feel better. It works for me.

Yes, a good rant can be very therapeutic for the spirit, and you can always apologize for it later, - if needed.

Harbal wrote:

Dontaskme wrote: but I actually think he's got a great mind.

You've already established that you're an idiot, this is nothing more than confirmation of it.

''The fundamental cause of the trouble in the modern world today is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt."
- Bertrand Russell

Dontaskme wrote:
''The fundamental cause of the trouble in the modern world today is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt."
- Bertrand Russell

Exactly! You've written a hell of a lot of clap-trap in the relatively short time you've been here, all of which you have delivered with an air of smug certainty. So, what do you think Bertrand would put you down as?

Harbal wrote: You've written a hell of a lot of clap-trap in the relatively short time you've been here, all of which you have delivered with an air of smug certainty. So, what do you think Bertrand would put you down as?

Those who have not realised the Self are Zombies in action.The whole world springs up only after the self springs up. It is surprising how one can speak of anything with certainty, even before realising the Self. The Importance of 'Self Realisation' cannot be over emphasized. An Idiot will always believe his mind 100% and live as a Body-Mind being.An Idiot will not be at peace within himself and also spoil other's peacefulness. A Self Realised person doesn't trust his mind too much and lives a Conscious life.So, what do you think Dontaskme would put you down as?


The more we live consciously the less chances are that we are permanent idiots, leave alone the fact that everyone of us behaves as idiots at some point or another in our life.

Dontaskme wrote:

I don't hate you, I just think you talk a load of fucking rubbish.

Harbal wrote: I don't hate you, I just think you talk a load of fucking rubbish.

Feel better now?

Harbal wrote: you talk a load of fucking rubbish.

Well, I've already established many times in my posts that all knowledge is illusory. It's made-up.

And that Life is it's own intelligence, Life doesn't talk about it, IT IS

Life is neither the reader nor the writer or good or bad. Reader, writer, good and bad is labels in the mind. The 'I' lives personal illusory labels in the mind. But, Life is a singular, spontaneous, uncontrollable and unpredictable impersonal flow.

The mind will trash what it doesn't understand...never quite realising there is nothing to understand, and that life just jogs along intelligently all by it's lickle lonesome.

Yet still, the 'personal' MIND will think it's the one in control, that it's the intelligent one, truth is, IT IS NOT

In life the ego is not present, and yet the ego says I can do, speak, think, allow, let go, permit, etc....go figure!


Is that smug enough for you or do you want more ?

Ps...the Self is prior to the mind...the mind is the extra..it's the add on..the walk in...the phantom of the opera, the play of lila, the illusion...ect

Ps...This is dangerous knowledge, and is why it is hated...and is why they killed JESUS


Important footnote.

It is not advisable to ever discuss this knowledge with close family members, loved ones and friends.

Dontaskme wrote:I've already established many times in my posts that all knowledge is illusory. It's made-up.

This is how I see it too.

Dontaskme wrote:This is dangerous knowledge, and is why it is hated...and is why they killed JESUS It is not advisable to ever discuss this knowledge with close family members, loved ones and friends.

So are you saying that knowledge, although illusory and made-up, can be assigned a meaning that has an effect? And if so, doesn't that make it as "real" as real can be for us? So... from which perspective are we to view it: illusory or real... and does that matter?

Lacewing wrote: So are you saying that knowledge, although illusory and made-up, can be assigned a meaning that has an effect? And if so, doesn't that make it as "real" as real can be for us? If this is so... from which perspective are we to view it: illusory or real... and does that matter?

Taken from the internet THE source of the only real KNOWLEDGE EVER WORTH KNOWING.


''Words are false; only the meaning they convey is true. They are illusion, but they give a meaning. Therefore, all is illusion but to understand the illusion, illusion is needed. For example, to remove a thorn in your finger you use another thorn; then you throw both of them away. But if you keep the second thorn which was used to remove the first one, you'll surely be stuck again. To remove ignorance, knowledge is necessary, but finally both must dissolve into Reality. Your Self is without ignorance, without knowledge.

Therefore, the Master and the seeker are illusion because they are "one." If you keep the second thorn, which means knowledge, even if it is a golden thorn, you'll be stuck [by the second thorn]. The ego is the only illusion and ego is knowledge.''

In other words..it is knowledge that separated us and it is knowledge that will unite us...but the divide was illusory. The real Self is tacit.

Dontaskme wrote:Taken from the internet THE source of the only real KNOWLEDGE EVER WORTH KNOWING.

Yeh, whatever.

No, seriously, I do see value in recognizing the illusion of things... IN ORDER to not take it (and the resulting limitations) so seriously. I think what hangs me up in regard to what you talk about, is you seem to be assigning it a value that you are suggesting nothing else has? Or at least that is worth more than that of other illusions. If it's ALL illusion, what difference does one illusion make over another?

Take your example of a thorn... and trying to dislodge it. Some people may be "here" to have a big ol' thorn stuck in them, and that's just their experience. And that person and their experience is a piece of art (or a piece of work... however another chooses to view it) ...and it's all just the "collective ONE" expressing, exploring, and manifesting ALL potential.

I relate to some of what you say... but a lot of it just makes my head spin around, and I'm not sure that's necessary. The simplicity you speak of, seems too involved and/or convoluted at times... to me. That's your artwork. Mine is different. I think words can really get in the way... and I don't think any of it really matters... we're just playing.

Dontaskme wrote:To remove ignorance, knowledge is necessary, but finally both must dissolve into Reality.

I see it this way too. But I don't think there is anything "to do" -- do you? -- rather we are simply forming our illusion (and our enjoyment of it, or not) while we "do this".

seeds wrote:
...please describe as best you can exactly what this unborn awareness is “aware of” when it resides in its incorporeal form?

Dontaskme wrote:
It's aware of thought.

What is aware of thought?

Something that is “aware” of something else implies the presence of a central or focalized point of consciousness that is capable of processing sense data.

In which case, you cannot simply offer up a vague and nebulous term such as “unborn awareness” and then expect it (whatever “it” is supposed to represent) to be aware of anything at all.

You have not explored the implications of your statement deeply enough and have simply assumed that nobody would wonder how a “cloud of life energy” (for lack of a better description), could somehow process mental holography (thought).

Furthermore, you have created a boldly titled thread in which you have proclaimed that the fundamental mistake of religions is that they do not embrace “non-duality.”

Yet ironically (and seemingly unbeknownst to you), in your statement that - “...it’s aware of thought...” – you have confirmed the existence of the “dual” nature of the very realm of which you are touting to be “non-dual.”

Hopefully this isn't too confusing, but first you have the “it” (as in that which is aware), and then you have “thought” (or that which the “it” is aware of) - ergo “two” things.

I am completely on board with the idea that the fundamental level of the “ALL-THAT-IS” exists in a state of “ONENESS” (in the Spinozan sense) in that there is but one basic substance composing all of reality.

However, I cannot help but to visualize that “ONENESS” substance as being an amalgam of the essence of life, and of that through-which life expresses itself (the essence of thought) – thus an implicit “duality.”
_______

Lacewing wrote:

Dontaskme wrote:I've already established many times in my posts that all knowledge is illusory. It's made-up.

This is how I see it too.

Really? How so?

attofishpi wrote:

Lacewing wrote:

Dontaskme wrote:I've already established many times in my posts that all knowledge is illusory. It's made-up.

This is how I see it too.

Really? How so?

(Atto... as soon as you start acting like an ass, you're going back on my ignore list... so I don't expect this exchange to last long.)

What I see (and what seems readily apparent) is how much of our lives and world and knowledge is made-up by ourselves, and how we assign to all of that the meaning that works for us. Our "knowledge" is based on the limitations of our perception and imagination at any given point in time. What we think we know, shifts or evaporates when we see or determine something else/more -- whether within a lifetime, or over generations. That's how I see knowledge as illusory. And "meaning" doesn't exist without us fabricating it.

thedoc wrote:

HexHammer wrote:Religion are powered by prophets, science are limited by scientists intellect.

Prophets are moved by a religious experience, scientists can provide us with articles of faith, or prove that they are not what they claim to be.

No, prophets are moved by their visions.

Scientists can't provide anything in religitous terms, most scientists rejects religion.

..else plz provide evidense for your mad claims.