Philosophy Now Forum

Dontaskme wrote:

ken wrote:
What are you trying to say here?

I've no idea.

you can say that again.

ken wrote:

Dontaskme wrote:

ken wrote:
What are you trying to say here?

I've no idea.

you can say that again.

Why did you not hear the first time?

Or maybe your just deaf.

Dontaskme wrote:

ken wrote:

Dontaskme wrote:
I've no idea.

you can say that again.

Why did you not hear the first time?

Or maybe your just deaf.

you can not hear because the silence is deafening.

you can not see because the light is blinding.

ken wrote:
you can not hear because the silence is deafening.

you can not see because the light is blinding.

All things seen and heard evaporate into the light of awareness.

Dontaskme wrote:

ken wrote:
you can not hear because the silence is deafening.

you can not see because the light is blinding.

All things seen and heard evaporate into the light of awareness.

I am awareness. I see and know all.

dontaskme only sees an evaporated illusion.

dontaskme is not able to see reality.

ken wrote:
I am awareness. I see and know all.

Awareness IS... awareness sees and knows all ...as and through appearance.

ken wrote:dontaskme only sees an evaporated illusion.

Dontaskme is the illusion.

ken wrote:dontaskme is not able to see reality.

That which exists as an illusion does not see reality. Reality IS

Dontaskme wrote:

ken wrote:
I am awareness. I see and know all.

Awareness IS... awareness sees and knows all ...as and through appearance.

Just as I said, I am and therefore IS awareness. I see and know ALL.

Dontaskme wrote:

ken wrote:dontaskme only sees an evaporated illusion.

Dontaskme is the illusion.

The Truth IS dontaskme does NOT know what it is.

Dontaskme wrote:

ken wrote:dontaskme is not able to see reality.

That which exists as an illusion does not see reality. Reality IS

That which exists NOW IS Reality. dontaskme ONLY sees what has previously appeared and long gone, i.e., not what IS Reality. Reality IS, I am creating, what WILL be-come.

ken wrote:
Just as I said, I am and therefore IS awareness. I see and know ALL.

Only as I appear. What is seen and known is an appearance in Awareness. Awareness is the emptiness from where I look at my mirror image.

ken wrote:The Truth IS dontaskme does NOT know what it is.

Dontaskme is the known...therefore doesn't need to know what it is.

ken wrote: That which exists NOW IS Reality. dontaskme ONLY sees what has previously appeared and long gone, i.e., not what IS Reality. Reality IS, I am creating, what WILL be-come.

Dontaskme doesn't see anything, dontaskme is the looked upon, this is no thing looking at itself as a thing seen. No thing has ever been seen as no one is looking at it. The seer is spontaneously creating itself as and through the seen as an illusion.

Dontaskme wrote:

ken wrote:
Just as I said, I am and therefore IS awareness. I see and know ALL.

Only as I appear. What is seen and known is an appearance in Awareness. Awareness is the emptiness from where I look at my mirror image.

. I am Awareness. I am aware of what dontaskme is and of what Everything else, including the I, is. That is the difference between dontaskme and I. dontaskme does not know anything whereas I see and know ALL, including who 'I' am?

Dontaskme wrote:

ken wrote:The Truth IS dontaskme does NOT know what it is.

Dontaskme is the known...therefore doesn't need to know what it is.

And just has you have rightly said, dontaskme will never know.

dontaskme is unsure of everything it says and writes. I, however, am sure.

Maybe dontaskme does not need to know what it is. But that is just an excuse to not be a responsible person. dontaskme can blame anything else for its doing because as dontaskme says, "dontaskme doesn't need to know what it is". What dontaskme is is known by Me, and distorting Truth is not helping dontaskme at all. Ken is also the known, and maybe does not necessarily need to know what it is, but the difference is ken does know what it is. ken wants to be responsible for everything ken says and does. ken can also back up every written word and sentence. This is the opposite of dontaskme. 'dontaskme', by definition, says exactly what it is, i.e., afraid to be challenged on what it says and writes.

Dontaskme wrote:

ken wrote: That which exists NOW IS Reality. dontaskme ONLY sees what has previously appeared and long gone, i.e., not what IS Reality. Reality IS, I am creating, what WILL be-come.

Dontaskme doesn't see anything, dontaskme is the looked upon, this is no thing looking at itself as a thing seen.

i would like to clarify with dontaskme what 'no thing' means, to dontaskme, but by the name you have given yourself and by the responses you do supply you unfortunately are obviously not capable of answering questions properly.

Dontaskme wrote:No thing has ever been seen as no one is looking at it. The seer is spontaneously creating itself as and through the seen as an illusion.

dontaskme is obviously so confused. "No one is looking at no thing". Why would any sane person write this? And then write, the same no one looking 'seer' is creating itself as and through the no thing seen, as an illusion.

What illusion?

What seer?

What is seen?

If there is no one, then why write 'seer'?

If there is no thing, then why write 'seen as an illusion'?

I know why dontaskme can not say what it is that it wants to say. Obviously dontaskme does not even know this.

ken wrote:
What illusion?

The illusion known by itself, who that it no one knows.

ken wrote:What seer?

An idea known by the one with the knowing, this is so intimate with itself. It knows itself in it's appearance, in the experience, and in the experience the boundless free energy is infinitely transforming itself from one form to another, always spontaneous and free. It's not a thing and it's all things. There is No other thing outside of this immediate seer who knows the seer, the seer is itself as it appears in the seeing/seen...in this intimate appearance here now with itself closer than the nose on your face. While appearances arise and fall away, that in which they appear does not, that thatness in which all appears is always here being itself, it's pure beingness experiencing and knowing itself, if it didn't it wouldn't be able to be or recognise itself...sorry for constantly repeating myself.

ken wrote:What is seen?

An image of the image-less. Images of consciousness ...the knowing...known in the image, by consciousness.

ken wrote:If there is no one, then why write 'seer'?

There's just non local seeing, aka consciousness. Known in the seeing. Known in the object seen, the object doesn't know or see, it is the known, in the experience, there is nothing inside or outside an experience experiencing it...it is the experiencing...appearing to itself as writing on a computer screen known as it arises....as seen...the seer can only see itself as imaged, or in concepts, colour, sound, words, number, form and meaning....all of which are illusory manifestations of itself...aka as non located dream stuff...mirages.

ken wrote:If there is no thing, then why write 'seen as an illusion'?

Something knows itself, what that knowing is is unknown even to itself....there is nothing inside or outside the self knowing itself... there's just self reflecting itself.

ken wrote:I know why dontaskme can not say what it is that it wants to say. Obviously dontaskme does not even know this.

No one is speaking, there is just speaking happening, it's not even speaking, it's just sound appearing from nowhere....interpreted by the brain robot as having meaning and purpose in order that the robot can function sanely in reality..the robot brain can only know what's been artifically programmed into it, it has no idea it is conscious, consciousness is the robot, the robot is the agent consciousness uses to function....programming in the robot brain is an energetically known and understood function known instantly as it arises within it one with the knowing as experienced, the subjective experiencer is not a thing and yet is all things, dontaskme is the robotic experience, the thing known which comes and goes in this boundless subjective energy having the objective temporal experience, dontaskme is not having the experience, it is the experience.

Hope this is also confusing....but hal I'm only programmed to know that what I've experienced....else I know fuck all.

ken wrote:
Maybe dontaskme does not need to know what it is. But that is just an excuse to not be a responsible person.

Aww, how sweet you use the responsibility card. Taking responsibility is an automatic response, it's an instant knowing in the moment else there would be chaos..and it's not taken by the agent but by that which is running the agent.

I don't know how many more times I have to say this, but responsibility is being taken care of as and through dontaskme the agent of consciousness, consciousness automatically knows what to do ..it's self knowing. If I put my hand in the fire I'm going to automatically remove it else it burns. It's automatically known, but not by the machine aka dontaskme.

i would like to clarify with dontaskme what 'no thing' means, to dontaskme, but by the name you have given yourself and by the responses you do supply you unfortunately are obviously not capable of answering questions properly.

You are so passive abusive aren't you.

A rose by any other name is still a rose you dumbo. Why are you constantly asking me when you already know all the answers. What benefit is it to you that I am able or not able to answer your questions to me? your beginning to sound like a right weird internet stalking freak.

i would like to clarify with dontaskme what 'no thing' means, to dontaskme,

Why don't you just die, and then see if your answer to what no thing means appears to you.

Dontaskme wrote:

ken wrote:
What illusion?

The illusion known by itself, who that it no one knows.

'I' KNOW what 'I' AM. How many times do I have to tell you this before you start to understand. I am NOT an illusion. dontaskme's ridiculous statements are absolutely meaningless without any evidence of what "it" says. I have tried to challenge on what you say but you will not answer my clarifying questions. So i can only oppose by saying, I CAN and DO KNOW, so dontaskme is wrong. I have repeatedly asked to be challenged on what I say, but dontaskme is either too afraid to or is prevented from doing so, by the belief system. I KNOW what the answer here is, but dontaskme being too stupid would not recognize this.

Dontaskme wrote:

ken wrote:What seer?

An idea known by the one with the knowing, this is so intimate with itself. It knows itself in it's appearance, in the experience, and in the experience the boundless free energy is infinitely transforming itself from one form to another, always spontaneous and free. It's not a thing and it's all things. There is No other thing outside of this immediate seer who knows the seer, the seer is itself as it appears in the seeing/seen...in this intimate appearance here now with itself closer than the nose on your face. While appearances arise and fall away, that in which they appear does not, that thatness in which all appears is always here being itself, it's pure beingness experiencing and knowing itself, if it didn't it wouldn't be able to be or recognise itself...sorry for constantly repeating myself.

And again I am sorry you completely repeat what is wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, and wrong.

Why do you even bother repeating when you yourself said dontaskme can NOT know any of this.

dontaskme is so wrong here. BUT I can not refute what dontaskme writes because "it" will never clarify what "it" is trying to say, and "it" just says words are never successful in understanding, which by the way is totally WRONG also.

I can NOT prove this to dontaskme because dontaskme is blinded by beliefs. dontaskme is NOT able to see the Truth, yet. I am only able to prove this to others, which is what I am doing here.

Dontaskme wrote:

ken wrote:What is seen?

An image of the image-less. Images of consciousness ...the knowing...known in the image, by consciousness.

WTF?

If you can not explain what you are saying, then just repeating it IS NOT getting you anywhere also.

What do you propose an image of the image-less would look like?

Dontaskme wrote:

ken wrote:If there is no one, then why write 'seer'?

There's just non local seeing, aka consciousness. Known in the seeing. Known in the object seen, the object doesn't know or see, it is the known, in the experience, there is nothing inside or outside an experience experiencing it...it is the experiencing...appearing to itself as writing on a computer screen known as it arises....as seen...the seer can only see itself as imaged, or in concepts, colour, sound, words, number, form and meaning....all of which are illusory manifestations of itself...aka as non located dream stuff...mirages.

WRONG

WRONG

WRONG, and

WRONG, AGAIN.

Dontaskme wrote:

ken wrote:If there is no thing, then why write 'seen as an illusion'?

Something knows itself, what that knowing is is unknown even to itself....there is nothing inside or outside the self knowing itself... there's just self reflecting itself.

Let us see if you can read these words, I KNOW, and just to clarify that up, I KNOW ALL, that which you say I do not and can not know.

Fairly strong statement I am saying, do you not agree?

Why not challenge Me on it?

Dontaskme wrote:

ken wrote:I know why dontaskme can not say what it is that it wants to say. Obviously dontaskme does not even know this.

No one is speaking, there is just speaking happening, it's not even speaking, it's just sound appearing from nowhere....interpreted by the brain robot as having meaning and purpose in order that the robot can function sanely in reality..the robot brain can only know what's been artifically programmed into it, it has no idea it is conscious, consciousness is the robot, the robot is the agent consciousness uses to function....programming in the robot brain is an energetically known and understood function known instantly as it arises within it one with the knowing as experienced, the subjective experiencer is not a thing and yet is all things, dontaskme is the robotic experience, the thing known which comes and goes in this boundless subjective energy having the objective temporal experience, dontaskme is not having the experience, it is the experience.

Hope this is also confusing....but hal I'm only programmed to know that what I've experienced....else I know fuck all.

Robot is right. dontaskme has been that conditionally programmed that "it" is unable to learn, thus see nor know, any thing any more. An once intelligent being was ruined completely. But there is a reason why dontaskme was created so "wrongly".

I needed to show that once a "robot" is created unfortunately no outside help is possible. No matter what any one or any thing does there is no thing that can help a "robot" human being. I have created the belief system so powerful, for reasons already expressed, which is needed in order to achieve the goal but the belief system itself can and sometimes does override one's true potential. But this was another necessary part in being able to fulfill our truest desired destiny. Reasons and explanations on this other necessary part that is needed in order to learn what is right and what is wrong in life will be given later. However, once a human being has reached the "robot" stage of only believing, seeing, observing and perceiving, ONLY from what has been pre-programmed into it, then that person is ruined.

Re-programming, however, one's own brain is a very simple and easy thing to do once you know how to do it. Unfortunately as has been proven here so far "robots", unless change is sought by themselves, are beyond being able to be re-programmed at all, either by themselves nor by any thing else.

What dontaskme was pre-programmed to do has already been shown throughout these writings, and which is already obvious to all who have already obtained understanding of how the Mind and the brain work. dontaskme is living, although robotic repeating, proof of a being not able to observe, look, see and learn for and by itself. dontaskme is just the name a pre-programmed "robot" has given to itself. A robot that is programmed to think and believe 'I do NOT know but I will just keep re-repeating that what I do not know', and, 'do not ask me' to clarify that what "i" am saying'. This "robot" was given some insight, and thus was programmed with some information, which came from the enlightened One, which is also proof that will lead others to see the Truth, but the reason that is all this robot was given is to show and thus provide evidence of exactly how a brain can completely fool itself. dontaskme is just programmed to prove what I have actually been saying all along, i.e., the brain can and does prevent itself from seeing, uncovering and thus discovering and knowing the Truth. This "robot" brain is like all religious robot brains when they believe 'we can NOT know the Truth'. They just keep repeating themselves over and over and over again. Until other brains start believing the same distorted truth. The human brain is actually able to fool itself into believing things that are completely the opposite of what really is true.

The Truth is I have been using dontaskme to show through empirical evidence what I say, which is if people remain open, then I am able to show not just how you are able to find the answers that will lead to you living in peace and harmony but how we ALL can and WILL live together in peace and harmony. I am just using the people of nowadays so that soon people will gain the understanding that is needed in order for every One what it is that we ALL truly want.

Further evidence of how a brain that holds beliefs can be completely stupefied will be provided with dontaskme's next response.

Okay ken you are right and I am wrong. I accept that, so now can we just agree to disagree with each other and lets call the whole thing off. In other words for christ sake please stop talking to me. I've already awakened to truth, I do not have to seek your approval of that. How would you ever know that I haven't awakened to truth? are you me?...don't ask me anything else or talk to me anymore. If you do reply again then that will only prove to me what an absolute disrespectful idiot you are.

''if people remain open, then I am able to show not just how you are able to find the answers that will lead to you living in peace and harmony''

PS..Wanting peace and harmony is why you suffer. You are a very angry person, it comes out clearly in your writing. And you are seeking for love. It's pitiful.

Life doesn't demand love, peace, harmony, happiness and bliss, because it's never experienced lack of peace,disharmony, unhappiness, rejection, or ever been at war with itself.