Why God cannot be understood totally by us?

[Dontaskme]

God is a human conceptual invention. Since there are many people, there are many separate inventions. Since God explains nothing, the definitions are stretched beyond reason, confused and incompatible one with the other.
Why would such a state of affairs offer coherence?

Because without the concept present there would be no thing to investigate or explore what it is we are trying to understand. And the energy expressing as a human experience likes to explore what it doesn't understand.

God is not a human concept. Because a human is also a concept. Concepts are self arising. No concept makes a concept happen. Wanting to know anything is concepts trying to understand other concepts about those concepts. That's why God aka the no thing is already that in which things arise/ self arising concepts of SELF...invented by itself in order to experience and know itself via the pen so that it the no thing could become a something...as and through a concept via the pen, and the pen is the only available tool as a means to understanding and explaining itself which is no thing and never in need of understanding or explanation because it just is without any confusion.

The source of the fictional story of I existing as things cannot explain anything, since there is nothing really to explain or understand in a fiction. But the mind aka no thing aka God that identifies itself as actually being the concept it imagines gets confused...because it's already being it SELF...without needing the concept. The Self aka God in which the concept of I arises is never confused in this regard...because it's always perfectly whole and complete in every moment.

The substratum of all thoughts and feelings is your Self. God is just another concept for SELF

And since all names, labels and descriptions, are concepts. In truth life is but an imagination appearing real as the concept depicts . Row row row your boat.

[Hobbes' Choice]

God is a human conceptual invention. Since there are many people, there are many separate inventions. Since God explains nothing, the definitions are stretched beyond reason, confused and incompatible one with the other.
Why would such a state of affairs offer coherence?

Because without the concept present there would be no thing to investigate or explore what it is we are trying to understand. And the energy expressing as a human experience likes to explore what it doesn't understand. .

You have fallen at the first hurdle I'm afraid. You are assuming that there is indeed 'something" rather than nothing to understand. This is a long and persistent failing of the human mind to start with the thing believed to exist and to them apply like useless accretion rationales that seem to back up or fortify the false concept. Thankfully the introduction of the scientific method, which examines the evidence first and gives empirical primacy to our experience has transformed our understanding of nature.
For most people, we are now no longer at the mercy of our imaginings, and bound by our superstitions having moved from our childhood of deduction to the maturity of induction.

[Dontaskme]

God is a human conceptual invention. Since there are many people, there are many separate inventions. Since God explains nothing, the definitions are stretched beyond reason, confused and incompatible one with the other.
Why would such a state of affairs offer coherence?

Because without the concept present there would be no thing to investigate or explore what it is we are trying to understand. And the energy expressing as a human experience likes to explore what it doesn't understand. .

You have fallen at the first hurdle I'm afraid. You are assuming that there is indeed 'something" rather than nothing to understand.

No, because that 'something' is thought. It's an idea..arising in no thing. All thoughts are instantly known in the instant they arise by that no thing in which they are arising..aka awareness.

[Dontaskme]

Thankfully the introduction of the scientific method, which examines the evidence first and gives empirical primacy to our experience has transformed our understanding of nature.
For most people, we are now no longer at the mercy of our imaginings, and bound by our superstitions having moved from our childhood of deduction to the maturity of induction.

And what is that evidence, what is that understanding, you've failed to show it, you've mentioned it, so now all you have to do is show it in words. Lets here the first cause please?

[Hobbes' Choice]

Because without the concept present there would be no thing to investigate or explore what it is we are trying to understand. And the energy expressing as a human experience likes to explore what it doesn't understand. .

You have fallen at the first hurdle I'm afraid. You are assuming that there is indeed 'something" rather than nothing to understand.

No, because that 'something' is thought.

No it is not. That something a A thought. It is like many other thoughts a wrong thought. A mistaken thought, A thought wished for, a thought shared and never understood, a confused thought, a thought without basis.

[Hobbes' Choice]

Thankfully the introduction of the scientific method, which examines the evidence first and gives empirical primacy to our experience has transformed our understanding of nature.
For most people, we are now no longer at the mercy of our imaginings, and bound by our superstitions having moved from our childhood of deduction to the maturity of induction.

And what is that evidence, what is that understanding, you've failed to show it, you've mentioned it, so now all you have to do is show it in words. Lets here the first cause please?

I have no burden of evidence. I'm not the one believing in a stupid idea. That's YOUR problem. Sorry but that is how it works. SImply burden of proof.

[Dontaskme]

You have fallen at the first hurdle I'm afraid. You are assuming that there is indeed 'something" rather than nothing to understand.

No, because that 'something' is thought.

No it is not. .

Yes it is a thought. Tell me what some thing is without using a thought, or a concept?

[Dontaskme]

I have no burden of evidence. I'm not the one believing in a stupid idea. That's YOUR problem. Sorry but that is how it works. SImply burden of proof.

No burden of evidence for what? ..an idea.

Exactly, you have no idea what any thing is without using the only tool available which is a concept. Therefore, your always being yourself which is the real fictional being.


So where's the problem, what is there to understand? understanding is always self evident, no burden here.

[Beauty]

I said, "A rose is a rose is a rose," which means it would smell as sweet no matter what name you use to call it by.
Where are the words? In the air? But where?
Similarly where is the sound? Can you see it? No.
Where is the magnetism, heat, cold, electromagnetism, feeling, understanding, thinking etc? We cannot actually see all that, it is not visible.
So there is something in this world, a property that we simply cannot understand.
That property can help explain God fully but our minds cannot comprehend that property. Why?
Because we are the physical according to our spirit, and so have limitations. We are visible, God is not.
The spirit in us is God, boundless. Which would be why we can think, feel, understand etc. - and no limits.
Physical understands physical.
Spiritual understands spirit and physical because spirit is all powerful God.
We are somewhat spirit too, and so we ponder about God.
God understands us fully, we don't understand God fully.
God is all knowing, "Omniscient." We are not.

If I can't fully understand the OP, how the hell do you expect me to understand God?

PhilX

I can understand your problem certainly, of course you would have to know your a b c to be able to understand higher stuff, and since you don't, therefore it would be impossible for you to understand higher stuff.

[Dontaskme]

Thankfully the introduction of the scientific method, which examines the evidence first and gives empirical primacy to our experience has transformed our understanding of nature.

Nothing can be known by man, without first understanding the original fundamental knower.
Man, unfortunately is not the original knower. Man knows nought, he only think he does.
The mind rejects that notion and in doing so lives in total ignorance of the true nature of reality. Man thus is no more relevant or significant than a barking dog.

All phenomena is invented by 'thought' full stop.


''I think therefore I am'' ... is deeply flawed, because if you don't think ...are you even there? what the heck is thought? has science discovered that ? can science hold a thought up in front of their eyes and examine it?

They are merging together right now as we speak. And they will both arrive at the same conclusions regarding the nature of reality...albeit illusory, appearing real. ''Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.''

[Beauty]

Another good question is, "Who are you before thoughts enter into the mind?"

Is that your own question or is it a quote from somewhere?
I think the answer is that we are like a thing before thoughts enter our mind, so we are without consciousness - without thinking, feeling, understanding.

[Hobbes' Choice]

Thankfully the introduction of the scientific method, which examines the evidence first and gives empirical primacy to our experience has transformed our understanding of nature.

Nothing can be known by man,

Then I suggest you stop writing annoying posts.

Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen

[Dontaskme]

Nothing can be known by man,

Then I suggest you stop writing annoying posts.

The totality of existence is never annoyed. Man in his mistaken belief that he is separate from the totality may become annoyed at anything that compromises his belief that he is the doer and thinker.

In the knowing ...that nothing can be known by man, aka a concept, it is known that all is well. And that it is only illusory thought that thinks otherwise...I mean what is wrong with right now unless you think about it?

Your trapped in thought Hobbes, you need to get out of thought more and breathe easy. You get annoyed because you have not yet grasped the deep profound understanding that is this immediate Nondual nature aka existence. It's a knowledge that has to be studied like every other knowledge based subject... but only studied if you have been conditioned away from that knowledge into the false knowledge of believing you are a separate doer/thinker. Then in that case, one has to follow truth back to it's source, one has to undo all what was once believed back to the realisation that there never was a separate believer...and that any belief about anything at all was just coming from your own projection as the believer...and not existing outside of your belief.. there is no world outside of you, If there was, you'd be able to step out of your own consciousness and into another persons consciousness to verify there is something other than you outside of you...this is impossible.

Nothing I say will give you the knowledge of the one, you have to work on that for yourself. If you understood it now, you would not find these posts annoying, and the fact that you do speaks volumes...that you have not yet understood the Nondual nature of existence aka totality.

When you don't want anything there is no thinking. It is your thinking that separates you from the totality of nature.

Everything the living body organism needs is an ordinary automatic unitary function that does not require thought to function. It's self operational. Doesn't need any input from man because the totality is not a separate thing, it is everything and not a thing.

The man has no way of knowing he is alive or dead.
ONLY Knowledge tells him that. And the ONLY knower of knowledge is awareness, which is everything and nothing, in other words it's not mans knowledge, he is the knowledge already known, and the known can't know anything,...and that is what's called Nondual wisdom..

[Hobbes' Choice]

Then I suggest you stop writing annoying posts.

The man has no way of knowing he is alive or dead.
..

Like this stupidity.

[Dontaskme]

Then I suggest you stop writing annoying posts.

The man has no way of knowing he is alive or dead.
..

Like this stupidity.

It's not stupid, it's fact.

If there's only the totality, which there is. What is it that dies, what is it that's born ?...except the thought , aka conceptual knowledge of such. Concepts are known not by the concept itself, but by the awareness knowing of every thought and concept as it arises in awareness inseparable from it.
This implies that no thing knows, because knowing awareness is one without a second. In other words there are not two awarenesses.

Check that out for yourself... see if you can find two or more awarenesses?


When you press your finger against a tree, the sensation of hardness is not known by the sensation, or by the concept of you the human body... it is known by the knowing awareness of the concept or sensation ''hardness'' as and when the sensation concept of ''harness'' appears... both the knowing awareness and the sensation of ''hardness'' arise in conjunction with each other in the same instantaneous moment.

The known informs empty awareness that it is the knower, this implies that the empty is full of informed knowledge...which is illusory, since it's just an appearance of pure empty awareness. The knowledge is just as empty as the awareness that knows it.

The awareness is real only in relation to what is not real...aka knowledge. So only knowledge can tell you you are alive or dead. Awareness which is what you truly are.. is neither dead nor alive, only the knowledge informs such concepts as death and birth and you are not the knowledge, you are the knower of knowledge, you are the no thing in which the knowledge arises, not the knowledge itself...a concept known.