Dear Atheists. It's over.

[Age]

To choose a meaning of life requires a chooser

To 'want' a meaning of life requires a "wanter".
To 'need' a meaning of life requires a "needer". And,
To 'desire' a meaning of life requires a "desirer".

But, so what?

A chooser or a needer or a desirer requires a you/ I

That's what.

Are 'you' YET AWARE that 'you' are, LITERALLY, NOT 'I', and NEVER could be?

Whatever you/I want/need/desire life's purpose to be.

But once the meaning of a word is 'chosen', then the 'purpose' of 'that' can then be found, uncovered, or discovered, WITHOUT ANY 'want', 'need', NOR 'desire' NEEDED ANYWHERE here.

[Age]

'you' have completely and utterly MISSED what I was talking ABOUT and referring TO here.

And you have also missed what I was talking about and referring to.

Which was 'what', EXACTLY?

[Dontaskme]

But once the meaning of a word is 'chosen', then the 'purpose' of 'that' can then be found, uncovered, or discovered, WITHOUT ANY 'want', 'need', NOR 'desire' NEEDED ANYWHERE here.

So you never wanted to choose the meaning of life from a list of other choices, and so that choosing the meaning of life just literally happened without any intent to do so because there was no such need, want, or desire to choose the meaning of life...because the meanings of chosen words already existed prior to them all being discovered uncovered and found, and could not have been chosen had they not already existed in the first place.

Question is, who uncovered discovered, found what already existed? ..if not I

Are 'you' YET AWARE that 'you' are, LITERALLY, NOT 'I', and NEVER could be?

Which means no I chooses the meaning of life.

In other words, nothing is choosing the meaning of life via the usage of words.

[Age]

But once the meaning of a word is 'chosen', then the 'purpose' of 'that' can then be found, uncovered, or discovered, WITHOUT ANY 'want', 'need', NOR 'desire' NEEDED ANYWHERE here.

So you never wanted to choose the meaning of life from a list of other choices, and so that choosing the meaning of life just literally happened without any intent to do so because there was no such need, want, or desire to choose the meaning of life...because the meanings of chosen words already existed prior to them all being discovered uncovered and found, and could not have been chosen had they not already existed in the first place.

Question is, who uncovered discovered, found what already existed? ..if not I

i.

That is who.

Please "dontaskme" inform me that 'you' do ALREADY KNOW the DIFFERENCE between 'I' and 'i' here, which I have been USING and EXPLAINING for quite a while now.

But if 'you' STILL do NOT YET KNOW the DIFFERENCE, then just inform me and I will EXPLAIN the DIFFERENCE, to 'you', ONCE AGAIN.

Are 'you' YET AWARE that 'you' are, LITERALLY, NOT 'I', and NEVER could be?

Which means no I chooses the meaning of life.

In other words, nothing is choosing the meaning of life via the usage of words.

'you' here, OBVIOUSLY, still do NOT YET KNOW the DIFFERENCE between 'I' and 'i' in the way that those words are USED under the label of "age" here, correct?

[Dontaskme]

'you' here, OBVIOUSLY, still do NOT YET KNOW the DIFFERENCE between 'I' and 'i' in the way that those words are USED under the label of "age" here, correct?

The difference between the i and the I is obvious even to a 3 year old child.

One has a dot above it, the other is without a dot. The dotted one is also shorter that the undotted one.

Joking aside, there is no I or i except in this artificial conception within the unwritten story that is duality aka mind activity...albeit illusory.

[Age]

'you' here, OBVIOUSLY, still do NOT YET KNOW the DIFFERENCE between 'I' and 'i' in the way that those words are USED under the label of "age" here, correct?

The difference between the i and the I is obvious even to a 3 year old child.

One has a dot above it, the other is without a dot. The dotted one is also shorter that the undotted one.

Joking aside, there is no I or i except in this artificial conception within the unwritten story that is duality aka mind activity...albeit illusory.

LOL

So, to the 'fictional character' named "dontaskme" there is NO 'nondual One' nor Oneness.

[Dontaskme]

'you' here, OBVIOUSLY, still do NOT YET KNOW the DIFFERENCE between 'I' and 'i' in the way that those words are USED under the label of "age" here, correct?

The difference between the i and the I is obvious even to a 3 year old child.

One has a dot above it, the other is without a dot. The dotted one is also shorter that the undotted one.

Joking aside, there is no I or i except in this artificial conception within the unwritten story that is duality aka mind activity...albeit illusory.

LOL

So, to the 'fictional character' named "dontaskme" there is NO 'nondual One' nor Oneness.

There's just what's happening. And THIS is it.

Including every word that was ever spoken or written.

No one is making THIS happening happen, nor is there any one to unmake what is happening, nor any one to stop what is happening.

No one speaks, no one writes. Doing is done, no doer thereof.

[Age]

The difference between the i and the I is obvious even to a 3 year old child.

One has a dot above it, the other is without a dot. The dotted one is also shorter that the undotted one.

Joking aside, there is no I or i except in this artificial conception within the unwritten story that is duality aka mind activity...albeit illusory.

LOL

So, to the 'fictional character' named "dontaskme" there is NO 'nondual One' nor Oneness.

There's just what's happening. And THIS is it.

Including every word that was ever spoken or written.

No one is making THIS happening happen, nor is there any one to unmake what is happening, nor any one to stop what is happening.

No one speaks, no one writes. Doing is done, no doer thereof.

LOL

What is 'nondual' if 'it' is NOT One?

[Dontaskme]

LOL

So, to the 'fictional character' named "dontaskme" there is NO 'nondual One' nor Oneness.

There's just what's happening. And THIS is it.

Including every word that was ever spoken or written.

No one is making THIS happening happen, nor is there any one to unmake what is happening, nor any one to stop what is happening.

No one speaks, no one writes. Doing is done, no doer thereof.

LOL

What is 'nondual' if 'it' is NOT One?

Nondual is one.

This is known, because you are the knowing that cannot be known.

[Age]

There's just what's happening. And THIS is it.

Including every word that was ever spoken or written.

No one is making THIS happening happen, nor is there any one to unmake what is happening, nor any one to stop what is happening.

No one speaks, no one writes. Doing is done, no doer thereof.

LOL

What is 'nondual' if 'it' is NOT One?

Nondual is one.

ONCE AGAIN, 'you', "dontaskme", completely and utterly CONTRADICT "your" OWN 'self' here.

1. 'nor is there ANY one ...'

2. 'nondual IS one'.

This is known, because you are the knowing that cannot be known.

ONCE MORE this is completely and utterly CONTRADICTORY.

The seer and knower can NOT be seen NOR known, but "dontaskme" KNOWS and TELLS 'me' that 'i' AM the knowing, which also, supposedly, can NOT be known.

'you' "dontaskme" could NOT get MORE CONTRADICTORY here, even if 'you' wanted to be.

[Dontaskme]

ONCE AGAIN, 'you', "dontaskme", completely and utterly CONTRADICT "your" OWN 'self' here.

There is no SELF because there is no other than SELF

The contradiction is known, in the only knowing there is and that is nondual one consciousness.

[Age]

ONCE AGAIN, 'you', "dontaskme", completely and utterly CONTRADICT "your" OWN 'self' here.

There is no SELF because there is no other than SELF

Well because this OBVIOUSLY does NOT logically follow, we can DISREGARD this COMPLETELY.

Unless, OF COURSE, you are able to elaborate on this and/or explain this in some way.

The contradiction is known, in the only knowing there is and that is nondual one consciousness.

BUT 'contradiction' is NOT necessary. AND, ONLY some 'fictional character' would CREATE CONTRADICTION, and usually only when ATTEMPTING to back up and support some DISTORTED or RIDICULOUS BELIEF that 'they' are HOLDING ONTO.

[Dontaskme]

ONCE AGAIN, 'you', "dontaskme", completely and utterly CONTRADICT "your" OWN 'self' here.

There is no SELF because there is no other than SELF

Well because this OBVIOUSLY does NOT logically follow, we can DISREGARD this COMPLETELY.

Unless, OF COURSE, you are able to elaborate on this and/or explain this in some way.

The contradiction is known, in the only knowing there is and that is nondual one consciousness.

BUT 'contradiction' is NOT necessary. AND, ONLY some 'fictional character' would CREATE CONTRADICTION, and usually only when ATTEMPTING to back up and support some DISTORTED or RIDICULOUS BELIEF that 'they' are HOLDING ONTO.

No one cares.

But, hey, whatever Age, if you say so Age.

There's just what's happening, including my noise and your noise.

[Age]

There is no SELF because there is no other than SELF

Well because this OBVIOUSLY does NOT logically follow, we can DISREGARD this COMPLETELY.

Unless, OF COURSE, you are able to elaborate on this and/or explain this in some way.

The contradiction is known, in the only knowing there is and that is nondual one consciousness.

BUT 'contradiction' is NOT necessary. AND, ONLY some 'fictional character' would CREATE CONTRADICTION, and usually only when ATTEMPTING to back up and support some DISTORTED or RIDICULOUS BELIEF that 'they' are HOLDING ONTO.

No one cares.

But, hey, whatever Age, if you say so Age.

There's just what's happening, including my noise and your noise.

Okay, as long as 'you' are AWARE of just how utterly CONTRADICTORY 'you' statements and CLAIMS are here, then my job is done.

[Dontaskme]

Okay, as long as 'you' are AWARE of just how utterly CONTRADICTORY 'you' statements and CLAIMS are here, then my job is done.

Whatever you say Age, as this too is also what's happening, that no thing is making happen, nor is making what is happening unhappen.

Doing is done, no doer thereof.

Just THIS

.