Age wrote: ↑Sun Jan 02, 2022 1:55 pm
How can you NOT distinguish between the physical things and the 'nothingness' of 'empty space'?
Who would do that?
The distinction is purely conceptual within consciousness, inseparable from it. No one has ever seen consciousness, therefore, the difference is illusory, a difference where there is none. The word ''different'' is a concept known..no one has ever seen difference, no more than consciousness can be seen...consciousness is known, it is the knowing that cannot be known...you are that knowing.
And I have no idea as to HOW OR WHY dreaming happens, all I know is that it does.
Age wrote: ↑Sun Jan 02, 2022 1:55 pmWhich is NOT SURPRISING, AT ALL, considering that you can NOT even distinguish between what is a physical thing and the empty space which is NEEDED for physical things to exist.
Conceptually, there is space and the contents of space, however, the difference is illusory, since there is only consciousness conscious of itself alone all one without a second. The two things are actually one thing, there is no need for a middle man to point out difference.
I'm using the word ''space'' as a metaphor for consciousness.
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Jan 01, 2022 7:05 am
A mirror and it's reflection are indistinguishable,
Age wrote: ↑Sun Jan 02, 2022 1:55 pmBut they ARE, to me.
There is 'the mirror', and then there is 'the reflection'. Two VERY EASILY distinguishable things. Well to me they are anyway.
Within the dream of separation, there appears to be separate things, known as conceptual objects. In reality, there is no object separate from the space in which is it seen, since the object is made out of the space in which it occupies. Difference is the illusion of conceptual separation, that takes place in perception, and no one has ever seen perception.
Reality is an illusion ..full stop.
I'm using the ''mirror'' word as a metaphor for consciousness, by the way...many words for the same thing, all consciously known concepts, inseparable from the knowing.
Concepts are known and are indistinguishable from the knower, because language is consciousness in the shape and form of language. In other words, there is only consciousness.
The distinction between the knower consciousness and the object known is consciousness knowing, the difference is purely illusional.
You can make up your own mind about what I am saying to you, you can reject what I am saying in favor of your own ideas, but it will not change anything I have said, because what I am saying I am very sure about, and nothing you say to refute my saying will make any difference to me, I already know that what I am saying is correct, so I'm just warning you here.
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Jan 01, 2022 1:08 pm
inseparable and always one and the same phenomena, and that was my point, about the mirror analogy.
Age wrote: ↑Sun Jan 02, 2022 1:55 pmWell your point is NOT been SHOWN that well.
Well maybe to you there, but to me here, it's very well shown.
Age wrote: ↑Sun Jan 02, 2022 1:55 pmBy the way, your mirror analogy can be REFUTED as all one has to do is cover the face of the mirror and then there is NO reflection, but the mirror, OBVIOUSLY, REMAINS. Meaning; A mirror and its reflection ARE distinguishable.
But this is just the play of concepts again.
However, when I use the mirror analogy I'm talking about being conscious, or aware you are aware.
Of course a mirror as it is known can be covered over by a piece of cloth, so that when you look in it, no image will show.
But I'm not talking about those concepts, I'm talking about consciousness, being and presence, which are all the same one state that cannot be covered over....When I close my eyes, yes, there does appear to be a covering over of images seen, for they no longer can be seen when I close my eyes, but that's not what I am talking about. Consciousness, being, presence, is still occuring whether there are images seen or not. As soon as I open my eyes, images reappear, because they are inseparable from the consciousness that I am, the distinction between the seer and the seen are conceptual. In reality, the difference is illusory.
Age wrote: ↑Sun Jan 02, 2022 1:55 pmEven your OWN words CLEARLY points this Fact out. Saying, " A mirror and 'its' reflection' " means TWO separate or distinguishable things, and, saying, that those TWO things 'are' indistinguishable means there are TWO, different, things.
Well of course, words separate consciousness into seer and seen, this is obvious to everyone.
Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 01, 2022 11:48 amAnd 'a reflection' is ACTUALLY some thing other than 'a mirror', itself. A 'reflection' can be and ACTUALLY is 'a reflection'.
A 'mirror' AND a 'reflection' are two VERY DIFFERENT things, OBVIOUSLY.
The difference is conceptual,
Age wrote: ↑Sun Jan 02, 2022 1:55 pmName one thing that is NOT 'conceptual'.
No one can do that. Concepts are known by the seer, and the seer cannot see itself, nor can the knower know itself...without splitting it self in two...knowing and seeing are ONE without a second.. seeing and knowing as and through the concepts known, which are indistinguishable inseparable reflections of itself alone, all one. Any difference is illusory.
Age, you do seem to struggle with that word ''ILLUSORY''
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Jan 01, 2022 1:08 pm
a mirror is a mirror, a reflection is a reflection. Yes, two different concepts. But the point was, the mirror is a metaphor for consciousness, now that's not too difficult to work out that consciousness and the contents of consciousness are the same one phenomena.
Age wrote: ↑Sun Jan 02, 2022 1:55 pmBut 'consciousness' is just consciousness, while 'the contents of consciousness', if you have not guessed it already is 'the contents of consciousness'.
Therefore, all there is consciousness appearing to be two things..aka subject and object...obviously.
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Jan 01, 2022 1:08 pm
Different words for the same principle is all that I am saying.
Age wrote: ↑Sun Jan 02, 2022 1:55 pmWell if that is ALL that you are saying, then I suggest just say, "Different words for the same principle", and then we can LOOK AT 'that', and then DISCUSS 'that', that is; if we want to.
But can you YET SEE the CONTRADICTION in speaking that way?
Of course there is going to be a contradiction. For how can oneness be infinitely every other thing, of course it's contradictory, that's just unavoidable within the dream of separation, aka the conceptual realm of identification with thought.
Age wrote: ↑Sun Jan 02, 2022 1:55 pmAlso, remember you BELIEVE that 'this' can NOT be explained in words, NOR language, so to fulfill your OWN BELIEFS and 'confirmation biases' here you will, purposely, go out of your way to say things that are NONSENSICAL, ILLOGICAL, or SELF-CONTRADICTORY.
So it seems, and is why we are still to this day repeating over and over again using words, what it is we are trying to show each other, because it's very difficult to put into words...not that it's impossible...
By the way, what I say does appear to you to be NONSENSICAL, ILLOGICAL, or SELF-CONTRADICTORY...is perfect CLARITY to me here...so think what you like, as it will make no difference to what I know and experience as truth here in my mind.
as usual I have no idea what you are going on about.