Philosophy Now Forum

Immanuel Can wrote:

thedoc wrote:

Immanuel Can wrote: I could swear I said that...

I do understand why some people just throw up their hands and walk away from these internet Trolls, especially the ones who just seem to be here for a fight, and not to really discuss anything. They just disagree and argue for the sake of a fight.

It seems so. Still, I like to try to believe in people until they prove me wrong.

You are a lot more patient than I am, and I am extremely patient. My problem is that I have seen these kind of members before, and have a rather short fuse, where a Troll is concerned, I'm not here to fight, and will quickly walk away.

bahman wrote:Yes, I read his comment about form of Christian God but that is no fulfill me.

Me no understand.

bahman wrote:So what about my argument? Do you have any counter-argument to show me that I am wrong somewhere?

Ummm...how did you miss it?

You'll have to go back several pages to find it, but its that premises 2 and 3 aren't solid.

bahman wrote:

ken wrote:

bahman wrote:
How It could be otherwise? God cannot be material otherwise we could experience It. So the only option which is left is spiritual.

This extremely narrow view of things just maybe the reason WHY you are still puzzled about them.

Could you please enlighten me?

Enlighten you to what exactly?

You have already informed us that God cannot be something, and that there is only one option left. How could I enlighten you? You already appear to know the answer already.

bahman wrote: To be honest I cannot imagine something which has no form and can hold knowledge.

The reason you are unable to imagine some thing is solely because you believe something else.

If you believe any thing, then you are not (fully) open. If you are not open and thus 'closed-minded', as it is said, then you are unable to imagine. If you are unable to imagine, then you are not able to find and see the truth.

If you unable to imagine something, because you believe something else, then, to you only, you already have and know the truth. Therefore, if you already believe you know the truth, and you come into a forum asking questions about things, which oppose your strongly held beliefs, then you are just trolling. The reason you are trolling only you can accurately answer for us, but some people might suggest that you are trolling out of boredom, or to reassure yourself that your beliefs are absolutely true, right, and correct, or something else.

Do you know, and are you able to explain, why you ask questions assuming that answers do not even exist, that is, answers do not exist according to your own beliefs and assumptions, which you insist and thus believe are true?

By the way the ridiculous of your statement here is that the statement's conception came about, and arrived in, the very two things that have no form.

bahman wrote:1) Knowledge is a sort of information which is comprehensible for a person
2) Information can be hold in something which has form (a brain for example) same for knowledge
3) God has no form since it is purely spiritual
4) We can deduce from (2) and (3) that God cannot have any knowledge

Knowledge may be knowledge of information or may not be. To understand information see

A Mathematical Theory of Communication by Claude Shanon. It defines what is meant by information. Information. Information does not necessarily have any meaning at all. It is a property of sets of symbols that is independent of their meaning.

The rest of your argument therefore fails.

Immanuel Can wrote:

"Rational?" What does that mean, if the world is illusion anyway?

The ''what is'' silent presence of reality, is not an illusion, the illusion is that there is an 'entity' that owns that presence. Presence stands totally alone, All one. Words or knowledge are illusions because words are auditory illusions of sound and light...appearing in silent stillness. Appearances are a movement in stillness. Stillness doesn't go anywhere, it is everywhere, the movement within it is the illusion.

The mind will always seek to rationalise the irrational emptiness of presence, simply by filling it up. That seeking for rationality, is irrational in the sense it knows it has no answers for the endless questions demanded by philosophy. Life does not have a proposition, life is spontaneity. Life does not petition either for or against itself. That's the minds job. And yet No one knows what the mind is or it's exact location and yet there is an energy playing out that acts as though there is, that is the irrationality of a reality that is made purely of the play of empty energy. The separate identity mind body mechanism is set up to rationalise or intellectualize that play of what is in fact empty energy. Energy is just a phenomena that is self perpetuating, existing as this endless dance between firing itself up from nothing appearing as something, eventually dissipating back into the great abyss from whence it appeared.

Immanuel Can wrote: "Truths"? What are they, if everybody has his or her own, and nobody need agree? "Investigation?" Why investigate the Land of Illusions, when nothing can be found for sure? "Knowledge"? What is there to be 'known' about illusions, except that they are illusory?

It all goes nowhere, if Zen is the Launchpad.

Exactly, ...it's just how this energy plays with itself. Now you see me, now you don't. Do I exist, don't I exist? Am I real, am I unreal, am I free, am I bound.


No one can catch this bird, hold it up and closely examine it, but that's what the mind tries to do. All in vain of course. First one would have to hold up the mind and look at that.

The illusion is that no thing is being everything. The everything is not an illusion, the illusion is that no thing is being everything. So the things that do actually appear, are emptiness appearing as fullness.

The mind imagines emptiness to be something desolate, something dead.But emptiness is the essence of life itself.
When you experience emptiness, there is pure peace.Emptiness does not mean you are empty.It means you are emptiness itself.
There is no 'you' to be empty, there is just the realisation of emptiness,that the emptiness is always here,that it is the backdrop of everything.Everything is so clear, so transparent, it is empty and that emptiness is pure consciousness. Like the water in the clearest mountain stream.Can you taste the freedom in that?

You are consciousness and consciousness is light. It is pure peace, pure fulfillment.

I'm not here for a fight, I'm here to show people something different. I'm here to say there is no need for fighting, how can oneness have an argument with itself...or want to hurt itself?

bahman wrote:To be honest I cannot imagine something which has no form and can hold knowledge.

There is no 'I' to imagine anything. Imagination is ''unimaginable'' 'I' is a thing of the imagination. Things of the imagination are not what they appear.

That which holds knowledge is the same ''that'' which holds a rainbow in the sky. Things of the imagination are images of imageless light. An image cannot know what light is because an image is already that light. An image cannot know itself. Only the light itself knows itself in it's image. but this knowledge is illusory simply because an image is a mirage of the imageless light.

There is no you or I that can ask the light what it is like to be light? ..that knowing is simply the light itself, it's not of the illusory image of light.

I hope this is clear to you.

I know you do not like to respond to me much, probably because I force you to think real hard in a way you are not accustomed to, and you probably are not used to thinking things out for yourself and is why you ask endless questions to others in the hope that someone will clarify what you already believe to be true but are not 110% actually sure about. And then to top all that, when the correct answer is given you ignore for reasons it did not fit with your already conceived ideal. Very confusing one you are.

DP

Dontaskme wrote:I'm not here for a fight, I'm here to show people something different. I'm here to say there is no need for fighting, how can oneness have an argument with itself...or want to hurt itself?

"People"? Can we be sure they even exist? Or are you just your own mind playing tricks on itself?

But if there is anything more than this, then are there not (at minimum)TWO distinct entities in the world -- your mind, and the Eternal Energy? And they must be distinct, if your mind can be shrouded by illusions, but the Eternal Mind cannot. So it can no longer be true to say, "All is one." There must be two...

And if that is untrue, then it raises the important question of how many other entities may actually exist, each not merely being subsumable into the One...

And then, what is the reality that is the source of the delusion? Is the Eternal a deceiver? If it is not, then whence comes the possibility of the illusion? And indeed, what can it possibly mean to say that physical reality is an "illusion" if there is no "non-illusionary," because all is actually One?

It just doesn't make sense. It can't be added up in any rational way at all. Its self-contradicting. No wonder, then, that Zen can only be "shown' and not rationally defended. But to ask people to believe completely gratuitously, how is that an intelligent or fair thing to ask?

ken wrote:

bahman wrote:

ken wrote: This extremely narrow view of things just maybe the reason WHY you are still puzzled about them.

Could you please enlighten me?

Enlighten you to what exactly?

You have already informed us that God cannot be something, and that there is only one option left. How could I enlighten you? You already appear to know the answer already.

Look my friend the problem is very simple. God has no form hence he cannot hold knowledge.

Immanuel Can wrote:

bahman wrote: So what about my argument? Do you have any counter-argument to show me that I am wrong somewhere?

Ummm...how did you miss it?

You'll have to go back several pages to find it, but its that premises 2 and 3 aren't solid.

I don't understand how they aren't sold. It is simple: You need a form for holding information/knowledge and God has no form since It is spiritual hence God cannot have information/knowledge.

Justintruth wrote:

bahman wrote: 1) Knowledge is a sort of information which is comprehensible for a person
2) Information can be hold in something which has form (a brain for example) same for knowledge
3) God has no form since it is purely spiritual
4) We can deduce from (2) and (3) that God cannot have any knowledge

Knowledge may be knowledge of information or may not be. To understand information see

A Mathematical Theory of Communication by Claude Shanon. It defines what is meant by information. Information. Information does not necessarily have any meaning at all. It is a property of sets of symbols that is independent of their meaning.

The rest of your argument therefore fails.

The idea is that information has to have a form whether you define it as something which carries a meaning or not so the rest of argument doesn't fall apart.

bahman wrote:

ken wrote:

bahman wrote:
Could you please enlighten me?

Enlighten you to what exactly?

You have already informed us that God cannot be something, and that there is only one option left. How could I enlighten you? You already appear to know the answer already.

Look my friend the problem is very simple. God has no form hence he cannot hold knowledge.

That is NOT a problem at all. That is just what you believe is true. How do you understand a 'problem'?

By the way why are you calling God a 'he'?

Immanuel Can wrote:

Dontaskme wrote:I'm not here for a fight, I'm here to show people something different. I'm here to say there is no need for fighting, how can oneness have an argument with itself...or want to hurt itself?

"People"? Can we be sure they even exist? Or are you just your own mind playing tricks on itself?

But if there is anything more than this, then are there not (at minimum)TWO distinct entities in the world -- your mind, and the Eternal Energy? And they must be distinct, if your mind can be shrouded by illusions, but the Eternal Mind cannot. So it can no longer be true to say, "All is one." There must be two...

And if that is untrue, then it raises the important question of how many other entities may actually exist, each not merely being subsumable into the One...

And then, what is the reality that is the source of the delusion? Is the Eternal a deceiver? If it is not, then whence comes the possibility of the illusion? And indeed, what can it possibly mean to say that physical reality is an "illusion" if there is no "non-illusionary," because all is actually One?

It just doesn't make sense. It can't be added up in any rational way at all. Its self-contradicting. No wonder, then, that Zen can only be "shown' and not rationally defended. But to ask people to believe completely gratuitously, how is that an intelligent or fair thing to ask?

People exist as an awareness of thought, in this case the conceptual thought of ''person'' - that is how 'person' is known. But Awareness has never actually seen a person, because a person is just an empty thought known by awareness. The idea of person can't see the awareness of that thought, because it is the awareness in which the thought arises. This is how fiction is born. Only the concept is born not the awareness. So concepts known cannot know anything for they only exist as fictions. Even the awareness of conceptual thought is a fiction simply because awareness is not a concept, so it too is born out of the same illusion that of the concept 'person'
Oneness becomes aware of itself as subject /object duality...by looking in it's own mirror...when that happens, the unseen unknown subject points back to itself via and through the seen known reflected object ....symbolised like this >< oneness appearing as two but inseparable as one. Like an arrow can point everywhere except itself, but two arrows can point to each other, and as they touch, they dissolve into one and other becoming one.

Reality is one inseparable seamless light energy reflecting itself everywhere like a mirror ball, an image cannot be separated from the mirror ball, I don't know if you've ever tried separating an image from a mirror lately..?

Awareness IS... and thoughts are too. Both are emptiness to the core only appearing full to the brim. (no thing knows how this illusion works only that it does)

If your not sure whether people exist, try asking a dog or a cat, but I doubt very much in your life time you'll get an answer from a creature that has no concept of a sense of personal identity, so there is a clue right there.

Yes, it does appear there are two selves at play here. One is eternally unborn.. the other one is born and dies. The one that is born and dies is an appearance in the eternal unborn. Appearances are that which come and go - are born and die..but since they are sourced in that which is unborn, without beginning or end, these appearances are illusory manifestations within the unmanifest. One defines the other...other being two. Using a cake analogy, when one cake is halved into two pieces, there is the appearance of two separate pieces of cake. But the illusion is that the two halves of the cake are just two pieces of the same one cake. The idea of separation is born in the cut, once cut, they cannot be whole. So the pieces of cake take on an imagined life of their own, never knowing what they actually are which is oneness.The cake knows it's pieces because it is the pieces, but the pieces become self identified and believe they are separate in nature, since that is how they appear to be, that is how they look to themselves. but the belief in being a separate individual slice of cake, is not coming from the slice, it's coming from the whole cake, that's how the cake comes to know itself. But the slice doesn't know that until it realises the truth of it's existence.

Reality is one appearing as two and three and four and five etc etc etc... without the appearance of other, one could never have known itself. How could one thing exist, how would it know that, if it didn't appear as other?..So how does the apparent split happen? it happens by looking at itself in the other, which is it's mirrored self.