Experiencing reality is certainly way easier than explaining it but that canRelinquish wrote:
Discard ALL conceptual answers and DIRECTLY EXPERIENCE what remains
not however satisfy the curiosity or desire to try and understand what it is
Experiencing reality is certainly way easier than explaining it but that canRelinquish wrote:
Discard ALL conceptual answers and DIRECTLY EXPERIENCE what remains
There is always a natural curiosity to understand ourselves.surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2017 6:37 amExperiencing reality is certainly way easier than explaining it but that canRelinquish wrote:
Discard ALL conceptual answers and DIRECTLY EXPERIENCE what remains
not however satisfy the curiosity or desire to try and understand what it is
But there is NO unsolvable mystery. AGAIN, just because at present you are unable to solve a supposed mystery does NOT mean, in of itself,Relinquish wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2017 5:35 am It seems that a deep acknowledgement of this unsolvable mystery may be the most 'open-eyed' stance that could be taken.
Obscure what?Relinquish wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2017 5:35 amWhat is seen by these open-most eyes? Any accepted answer (no matter HOW all-inclusive it SEEMS to be) will effectively obscure it.
The way to solve ALL, previous, mysteries and discover ALL, new, knowledge (as I have been saying all along) is to look from a truly open perspective.Relinquish wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2017 5:35 amDiscard ALL conceptual answers, and DIRECTLY EXPERIENCE what remains.
surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2017 4:19 amken wrote:
BUT you are trying to blame Me. You are using My presumed reaction to your words for not further expanding on
your answer so it is not a false claim at all. Read into what you are writing. What you are trying to do is obvious
It is a false claim for your presumed reaction is not at all my reason for not wishing to expand upon my answer
Two things here, I have not had a 'presumed reaction', and, what I said is NOT a false claim. YOU were the one who clearly stated that you would not expand on your answer because YOU presumed that I would have some sort of reaction. That reaction being that if you had expanded then that may not provide any more clarity for Me. That WAS the reason YOU gave for not expanding your answer further.
-----------------------------
Saying you see no reason to expand on your answer because it may not provide any more clarity for you
IS trying to blame Me for you not expanding on you answer. This does totally contradict what you have previously said
I said it may not provide any more clarity for you which does not mean it definitely would not provide any more for you
Why did you say this? I NEVER said it like you are proposing here. In fact I wrote exactly what you wrote. AGAIN, you are twisting things around. Do you do this purposely trying to get others not notice what you have said, to shift focus on to some other thing, or for some other reason?
--------------------------
Either way I have no wish to expand upon the definition I already gave as I was not intending to expand upon it anyway
Well if you had just said previously that you do not intend to do so, instead of trying to shift the blame onto some thing else, namely Me, then I would have just left it at that.
-------------------------------
Of course you have no more to say about this because you are unable to say any more
You are totally unable to expand on your answer. You can not explain it any further
So then why not just accept what I have said as the best possible answer I can give
Well if you had previously stated that that is the best and only answer you could give, then of course I would accept that. But when you try to blame Me, with some perceived assumed reaction that I might have, for you not expanding on your answer, especially when your answer did not really relate to the question, then of course I am going to show what you are doing. Even if you could not recognize it.
---------------------------
You also have no more to say because you do not want to look into what you are actually
doing and saying here. You also do not want others to see what you are doing and saying here
Both of these truth claims are false and so you therefore have no evidence for either of them
I think you are totally not open enough to see what Relinquish means by Direct Experience.ken wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2017 7:12 am
Assuming and believing that some things are unknowable and that there are some mysteries that can not be solved IS NOT having open-eyes. In fact making assumptions and having beliefs is having very closed-eyes, and is therefore the very opposite of being open.
Also, you have alluded to that it is possible to DIRECTLY EXPERIENCE reality, which contradicts exactly what you have been saying all along. That is if you could directly experience what Reality IS, then you could know what It IS, so then there would NOT be a mystery. And, that is why I continually say why not just look at what IS, before assuming and believing any thing first, which just means always remain OPEN, which could also be construed as look with open-eyes.
Go back to reading your early learning books, and leave the masters to their knowledge.Hobbes' Choice wrote: ↑Tue Aug 22, 2017 10:13 pm
Ah.... I see. You are no thing, so I can ignore you. And since you can't recognise "me", "I" as a distinct entity then you ought to be ignoring me too.
Since you actually responded to my post, you must recognise its thing-ness, so you are in contradiction.
Maybe I am, but to Me, dontaskme has repeatedly said that dontaskme does NOT know what it is talking about. What is written here is just more evidence of this.Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2017 8:04 amI think you are totally not open enough to see what Relinquish means by Direct Experience.ken wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2017 7:12 am
Assuming and believing that some things are unknowable and that there are some mysteries that can not be solved IS NOT having open-eyes. In fact making assumptions and having beliefs is having very closed-eyes, and is therefore the very opposite of being open.
Also, you have alluded to that it is possible to DIRECTLY EXPERIENCE reality, which contradicts exactly what you have been saying all along. That is if you could directly experience what Reality IS, then you could know what It IS, so then there would NOT be a mystery. And, that is why I continually say why not just look at what IS, before assuming and believing any thing first, which just means always remain OPEN, which could also be construed as look with open-eyes.
Direct experience means to see for ITSELF BY ITSELF...that a mystery is no mystery//and, or that no mystery is a mystery.
Nothing can be known without also knowing it's opposite known.
You are totally missing the point of what direct experience is.
.
Yes Ken.ken wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2017 10:34 am
Maybe I am, but to Me, dontaskme has repeatedly said that dontaskme does NOT know what it is talking about. What is written here is just more evidence of this.
Of course every thing has an opposite. The Theory Of Everything, in its most simplified level, IS there is an opposite of every thing, with equilibrium. The Universe, ITSELF, which is made up of two exactly opposite things sits in this equilibrium.
The reason I found what I KNOW IS because of direct experience, which can only happen by being completely open, which means having NO beliefs, NO preconceptions, and NO assumptions whatsoever of what could be the case. By just being completely OPEN and by just experiencing what IS the case, then that is how ALL was able to be revealed to me.
I discovered what IS actually true, right and correct because i was totally and truly Honest, Open, and Wanting to change My self for the better. Discovering, and then thus KNOWING, who and what the 'I' actually IS and who and what the 'i' actually IS and how they are different, which came from direct experience of ITSELF, is what allowed Me to KNOW the answers to what was previously mysterious to me. KNOWING Reality now being just one of those what was a mystery previously.
We just disagree on what can be KNOWN.Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2017 11:07 amYes Ken.ken wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2017 10:34 am
Maybe I am, but to Me, dontaskme has repeatedly said that dontaskme does NOT know what it is talking about. What is written here is just more evidence of this.
Of course every thing has an opposite. The Theory Of Everything, in its most simplified level, IS there is an opposite of every thing, with equilibrium. The Universe, ITSELF, which is made up of two exactly opposite things sits in this equilibrium.
The reason I found what I KNOW IS because of direct experience, which can only happen by being completely open, which means having NO beliefs, NO preconceptions, and NO assumptions whatsoever of what could be the case. By just being completely OPEN and by just experiencing what IS the case, then that is how ALL was able to be revealed to me.
I discovered what IS actually true, right and correct because i was totally and truly Honest, Open, and Wanting to change My self for the better. Discovering, and then thus KNOWING, who and what the 'I' actually IS and who and what the 'i' actually IS and how they are different, which came from direct experience of ITSELF, is what allowed Me to KNOW the answers to what was previously mysterious to me. KNOWING Reality now being just one of those what was a mystery previously.
I know you have discovered what IS actually true. I know this because I've discovered it too. That's how I know you KNOW.
It can be done, but it is a futile exercise, because adult human beings prefer to look for what is, perceived to be, wrong and point that out instead. That way they can feel more superior. They do this from lack of self-esteem. NOT knowing the real Self, means adult human beings are not sure of who they are, and not knowing who one is leaves them with some sort of inferiority complex. Also, the amount of varying and different knowing among all the varying, different people means that trying to find others to agree with ALL of our own knowing is near impossible.Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2017 11:07 amThe problem is when we are using our avatars to tell other avatars the truth, it gets a bit confusing, simply because we are trying to talk about the only one that knows using words, which are dual in their nature, it's like trying to describe silence by filling it up with words....it's counter productive...the truth is tacit Ken, you know this and I know this. We ARE this.
We are, you are, I AM the LAST AVATAR.
.
Trying to get people to describe their knowing to others to see if their knowing is agreeable to the other cannot be done Ken...
But this ALL can be explained. Once the One and only true Self is KNOWN, then the ability of what It can do and achieve is also KNOWN, and from that KNOWING ALL things are possible.
Well I suppose it can yes, but what I meant is that each explanation if going to differ in content, and content. Sages of all types have explained the true Self, and each account is different even though the overall message is the same message. That's all I'm pointing out to you Ken, do you not see that?
But you never had to point this out. I KNEW most of this already. What I did not know and what is wrong IS NO one, and I repeat, NO one has yet explained the true Self, correctly yet. If they had, then the rest would not be living as their pretentious selves.Dontaskme wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2017 1:21 pmWell I suppose it can yes, but what I meant is that each explanation if going to differ in content, and content. Sages of all types have explained the true Self, and each account is different even though the overall message is the same message. That's all I'm pointing out to you Ken, do you not see that?
Again, you did NOT need to tell Me this message. The first sentence I already KNEW, and again there is some thing incorrect, namely the second sentence. 'I' am the ALL-KNOWING that lives in the ever-present NOW. 'you' , ken, dontaskme, and all the other labelled human beings, are just people, who come into and out of existence, and while they are here they mostly just think they know. 'I' am the knowing and knower. 'you' are the thinking and thoughts.
EVERY thing could be said to be without doubt or error. BUT if there was no thing to doubt and no thing with error, then there would be no thing to change. And, change is inevitable. Also, if dontaskme can not see that the "world" that human beings create for themselves could not be become better, then I would say dontaskme is not seeing some things.
When dontaskme defines what the mind actually is, which is being talked about here, then we can further discuss.
The ONLY thing I split to be able to explain ALL-THERE-IS is adult human beings from child human beings. This is done only from a necessary point of view to be able to explain how ALL the meaningful answers in Life can be found, which when discovered by the way solves ALL the supposed mysteries of Life also.
So, if the true Self IS the KNOWER of ALL things, the this Self can KNOW what Its Self IS. The Self will then be the KNOWER and the KNOWN, which will be easily proven is possible, when I am fully challenged and questioned about this.
I define the mind as a thought ?
Yes, the Self can know itself.
ken wrote:...
To both of you:Dontaskme wrote:...
A shame all this had to be explained for it has no place in an otherwise excellent thread that could be read by everyone hereken wrote:
BUT you are trying to blame Me. You are using My presumed reaction to your words for not further expanding on
your answer so it is not a false claim at all. Read into what you are writing. What you are trying to do is obvious
It is a false claim for your presumed reaction is not at all my reason for not wishing to expand upon my answer
Two things here I have not had a presumed reaction and what I said is NOT a false claim. YOU were the one who clearly stated that you would
not expand on your answer because YOU presumed that I would have some sort of reaction. That reaction being that if you had expanded then
that may not provide any more clarity for Me. That WAS the reason YOU gave for not expanding your answer further
_________________________________
Saying you see no reason to expand on your answer because it may not provide any more clarity for you
IS trying to blame Me for you not expanding on you answer. This does totally contradict what you have previously said
I said it may not provide any more clarity for you which does not mean it definitely would not provide any more for you
Why did you say this? I NEVER said it like you are proposing here. In fact I wrote exactly what you wrote. AGAIN you are twisting things around
Do you do this purposely trying to get others to not notice what you have said to shift focus on to some other thing or for some other reason
_________________________________
Either way I have no wish to expand upon the definition I already gave as I was not intending to expand upon it anyway
Well if you had just said previously that you do not intend to do so instead of trying to
shift the blame on to some thing else namely Me I would have just left it at that then
_________________________________
Of course you have no more to say about this because you are unable to say any more
You are totally unable to expand on your answer. You can not explain it any further
So then why not just accept what I have said as the best possible answer I can give
Well if you had previously stated that that is the best and only answer you could give then of course I would accept that. But when you try
to blame Me with some perceived assumed reaction that I might have for you not expanding on your answer especially when your answer
did not really relate to the question then of course I am going to show what you are doing. Even if you could not recognize it as such
________________________________
You also have no more to say because you do not want to look into what you are actually
doing and saying here. You also do not want others to see what you are doing and saying here
Both of these truth claims are false and so you therefore have no evidence for either of them
YOU through your own words have already provided ALL the evidence I need. So I will let others decide if My claims are false
How was this supposedly an excellent thread?surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 24, 2017 2:32 amA shame all this had to be explained for it has no place in an otherwise excellent thread that could be read by everyone hereken wrote:
BUT you are trying to blame Me. You are using My presumed reaction to your words for not further expanding on
your answer so it is not a false claim at all. Read into what you are writing. What you are trying to do is obvious
It is a false claim for your presumed reaction is not at all my reason for not wishing to expand upon my answer
Two things here I have not had a presumed reaction and what I said is NOT a false claim. YOU were the one who clearly stated that you would
not expand on your answer because YOU presumed that I would have some sort of reaction. That reaction being that if you had expanded then
that may not provide any more clarity for Me. That WAS the reason YOU gave for not expanding your answer further
_________________________________
Saying you see no reason to expand on your answer because it may not provide any more clarity for you
IS trying to blame Me for you not expanding on you answer. This does totally contradict what you have previously said
I said it may not provide any more clarity for you which does not mean it definitely would not provide any more for you
Why did you say this? I NEVER said it like you are proposing here. In fact I wrote exactly what you wrote. AGAIN you are twisting things around
Do you do this purposely trying to get others to not notice what you have said to shift focus on to some other thing or for some other reason
_________________________________
Either way I have no wish to expand upon the definition I already gave as I was not intending to expand upon it anyway
Well if you had just said previously that you do not intend to do so instead of trying to
shift the blame on to some thing else namely Me I would have just left it at that then
_________________________________
Of course you have no more to say about this because you are unable to say any more
You are totally unable to expand on your answer. You can not explain it any further
So then why not just accept what I have said as the best possible answer I can give
Well if you had previously stated that that is the best and only answer you could give then of course I would accept that. But when you try
to blame Me with some perceived assumed reaction that I might have for you not expanding on your answer especially when your answer
did not really relate to the question then of course I am going to show what you are doing. Even if you could not recognize it as such
________________________________
You also have no more to say because you do not want to look into what you are actually
doing and saying here. You also do not want others to see what you are doing and saying here
Both of these truth claims are false and so you therefore have no evidence for either of them
YOU through your own words have already provided ALL the evidence I need. So I will let others decide if My claims are false
Who really cares? I do NOT.surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 24, 2017 2:32 amBut how many other members of the forum part from ken and Dontaskme will actually bother reading what they have written