Free will, freedom from what?

[Fairy]

See it yet?

Is it true that false is true? To say something is false would be true right? You wouldn’t be able to say something was, or is false without knowing the false was true.

Even a lie is the truth. You wouldn’t be able to say a lie is a lie without knowing the lie was true.

Forget about whether there is truth or lie.

Can you deny this moment right now, not really, and you don’t need to deny this moment, it is whether or not you impose a truth or falsity upon it, it simply is. To impose a truth or lie to this immediate present moment is never required for it’s self evident without doubt or error. Its all there is.

See what I mean?

[Immanuel Can]

See it yet?

Is it true that false is true?

You're confusing yourself. That's the only way to stay a Non-Dualist, of course: that is, to remain confused.

[Fairy]

See it yet?

Is it true that false is true?

You're confusing yourself. That's the only way to stay a Non-Dualist, of course: that is, to remain confused.

You’re the one who is confusing the issue.

It’s not a “someone” who is nondual or a nondualist as you like to call someone…but because you’re not listening to what’s actually being pointed to, perhaps because you can’t hear it… allow me to clarify….

Nonduality is not a thing known, it’s the no thing that knows all things. You are that knowing. Things are known, but not by the thing, but by the no thing that knows all things. Things know nothing, things are already being known, but not by the thing.

[Immanuel Can]

Is it true that false is true?

You're confusing yourself. That's the only way to stay a Non-Dualist, of course: that is, to remain confused.

… allow me to clarify….

Nonduality is not a thing known, it’s the no thing that knows all things. You are that knowing. Things are known, but not by the thing, but by the no thing that knows all things. Things know nothing, things are already being known, but not by the thing.

THIS is what you call "clarifying"?

Is that you, Kamala?

It's very simple: you can't be a Non-Dualist and say that Non-Dualism is true. Truth and falsehood is a binary, a dualistic assessment.

[Fairy]

You're confusing yourself. That's the only way to stay a Non-Dualist, of course: that is, to remain confused.

… allow me to clarify….

Nonduality is not a thing known, it’s the no thing that knows all things. You are that knowing. Things are known, but not by the thing, but by the no thing that knows all things. Things know nothing, things are already being known, but not by the thing.

THIS is what you call "clarifying"?

Is that you, Kamala?

It's very simple: you can't be a Non-Dualist and say that Non-Dualism is true. Truth and falsehood is a binary, a dualistic assessment.

Why do you keep repeating to me what I already know. We’ve already cleared up the dualism that is the reality of words and conceptual language ok?

But that’s not what non duality is pointing to,it’s pointing to the non conceptual reality that is originality and direct before it is artificially overlaid by concept in its human conception.




Now…tell me…

What is a thing?

[Fairy]

THIS is what you call "clarifying"?

Is that you, Kamala?

Your bigotry is showing.

That’s just a typical man conditioned response.

[Immanuel Can]

… allow me to clarify….

Nonduality is not a thing known, it’s the no thing that knows all things. You are that knowing. Things are known, but not by the thing, but by the no thing that knows all things. Things know nothing, things are already being known, but not by the thing.

THIS is what you call "clarifying"?

Is that you, Kamala?

It's very simple: you can't be a Non-Dualist and say that Non-Dualism is true. Truth and falsehood is a binary, a dualistic assessment.

Why do you keep repeating to me what I already know.

That is an excellent question! I shouldn't have to, should I?

If you've heard and understood, then that should be enough.

Thanks for that point. I agree. So enough has been said. I'll go on to other things.

[Immanuel Can]

THIS is what you call "clarifying"?

Is that you, Kamala?

Your bigotry is showing.

Which "bigotry" is that? Having standards? Having a brain?

That’s just a typical man conditioned response.

Oh? Not misandry at all, that.

[Fairy]

THIS is what you call "clarifying"?

Is that you, Kamala?

Your bigotry is showing.

Which "bigotry" is that? Having standards? Having a brain?

That’s just a typical man conditioned response.

Oh? Not misandry at all, that.

You don’t like being challenged that’s obvious. Your more the type to be longing to have adoring fan’s fawning all over you hanging on to your every word.

That’s obvious. When your being challenged you’re out, saying there’s nothing left to be said, typical man conditioned response.

[Fairy]

See it yet?

Is it true that false is true?

You're confusing yourself. That's the only way to stay a Non-Dualist, of course: that is, to remain confused.

This is what it’s like to not exist.

[Immanuel Can]

Your bigotry is showing.

Which "bigotry" is that? Having standards? Having a brain?

That’s just a typical man conditioned response.

Oh? Not misandry at all, that.

You don’t like being challenged that’s obvious.

I'll be happy to let you know when you say something I find challenging. Non-dualism ain't it. It's a very, very simple idea...nothing, in fact, could be simpler, or more simplistic, or less coherent, or more obviously self-contradictory. Non-dualism, if believed consistently, actually declares itself false, and thus self-defeats, even with no opposition in the room.

You really can't get anything that 's less of a "challenge" than that.

...typical man conditioned response.

Wow. Sexism, stereotyping, gender-essentialism...you've really got the trifecta there.

[Fairy]

Which "bigotry" is that? Having standards? Having a brain?


Oh? Not misandry at all, that.

You don’t like being challenged that’s obvious.

I'll be happy to let you know when you say something I find challenging. Non-dualism ain't it. It's a very, very simple idea...nothing, in fact, could be simpler, or more simplistic, or less coherent, or more obviously self-contradictory. Non-dualism, if believed consistently, actually declares itself false, and thus self-defeats, even with no opposition in the room.

You really can't get anything that 's less of a "challenge" than that.

...typical man conditioned response.

Wow. Sexism, stereotyping, gender-essentialism...you've really got the trifecta there.

If you say so.

Why I must be mistaken then, my bad, how awful of me to misjudge….gosh just fucking shoot me, or sue me.

[Immanuel Can]

You don’t like being challenged that’s obvious.

I'll be happy to let you know when you say something I find challenging. Non-dualism ain't it. It's a very, very simple idea...nothing, in fact, could be simpler, or more simplistic, or less coherent, or more obviously self-contradictory. Non-dualism, if believed consistently, actually declares itself false, and thus self-defeats, even with no opposition in the room.

You really can't get anything that 's less of a "challenge" than that.

...typical man conditioned response.

Wow. Sexism, stereotyping, gender-essentialism...you've really got the trifecta there.

If you say so.

I just point it out. It's there to be seen.

[Fairy]

I'll be happy to let you know when you say something I find challenging. Non-dualism ain't it. It's a very, very simple idea...nothing, in fact, could be simpler, or more simplistic, or less coherent, or more obviously self-contradictory. Non-dualism, if believed consistently, actually declares itself false, and thus self-defeats, even with no opposition in the room.

You really can't get anything that 's less of a "challenge" than that.

Wow. Sexism, stereotyping, gender-essentialism...you've really got the trifecta there.

If you say so.

I just point it out. It's there to be seen.

I know what you mean, I do the same, I just point it out as well. Except that you reject it because it’s beyond your comprehension…not mine.

Too bad. Not my concern, I can only keep pointing it out, which I will continue to do.

[Immanuel Can]

If you say so.

I just point it out. It's there to be seen.

...you reject it because it’s beyond your comprehension…

I reject it because it rejects itself. So should anybody.

If a belief cannot even make itself coherent with itself, then it's obviously a false belief.