All is energy / God is energy

[popeye1945]

Everything is energy...continually changing and consciously manifesting into countless forms.

I agree, everything is energy.
Here is another expression of the same one energy expressing and describing itself differently.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxdKxS7KSvU
Death is an appearance.
In fact, birth and death are the same thing, they just differ in appearance, that's all.

"Is there another expression of the same one energy expressing and describing itself differently."

I believe that would be Spinoza's substance as God, and where Spinoza says substance, one might replace the term substance with the term energy.

[Dontaskme]

Everything is energy...continually changing and consciously manifesting into countless forms.

I agree, everything is energy.
Here is another expression of the same one energy expressing and describing itself differently.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxdKxS7KSvU
Death is an appearance.
In fact, birth and death are the same thing, they just differ in appearance, that's all.

"Is there another expression of the same one energy expressing and describing itself differently."

I believe that would be Spinoza's substance as God, and where Spinoza says substance, one might replace the term substance with the term energy.

Spinoza's God
My God
IC's God
God's God

Is all the same one energy expressing as words....the same love action dreaming difference where there is none.

[popeye1945]

I agree, everything is energy.
Here is another expression of the same one energy expressing and describing itself differently.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxdKxS7KSvU
Death is an appearance.
In fact, birth and death are the same thing, they just differ in appearance, that's all.

"Is there another expression of the same one energy expressing and describing itself differently."

I believe that would be Spinoza's substance as God, and where Spinoza says substance, one might replace the term substance with the term energy.

Spinoza's God
My God
IC's God
God's God

Is all the same one energy expressing as words....the same love action dreaming difference where there is none.

Spinoza's point was that there is only one substance/energy/God out of which comes the many and thus all things are infinite in god/substance/energy.

[Dontaskme]

Spinoza's point was that there is only one substance/energy/God out of which comes the many and thus all things are infinite in god/substance/energy.

Yes I agree, this is known as the character in the dream is known, conceptually known as and through the story of I within the artificial dream of separation. (subject and object duality )

THIS is simply known, as you are the knowing, the only knowing there is, without doubt or error, simply Self-evident.

It doesn't even come out of itself, or returns to itself, except as illusory appearance and disappearance and reappearance of the same one energy pretending to be the many.

I agree with you popeye.

[Age]

Spinoza's point was that there is only one substance/energy/God out of which comes the many and thus all things are infinite in god/substance/energy.

Yes I agree, this is known as the character in the dream is known, conceptually known as and through the story of I within the artificial dream of separation. (subject and object duality )

THIS is simply known, as you are the knowing, the only knowing there is, without doubt or error, simply Self-evident.

"dontaskme" WHY can 'you' just NOT REFLECT on the words 'you' and 'I' and SEE how the way that 'you', the character here known as "dontaskme" is USING them in a COMPLETELY CONTRADICTORY WAY.

The word 'I' implies One. Whereas, the word 'you' implies "OTHER", of which there OBVIOUSLY is NOT with and in thee Oneness.

If 'you' just STOPPED listening to what 'you' have been TOLD and TAUGHT, and just REFLECTED on what these two words ACTUALLY MEAN and REFER TO, EXACTLY, then 'you' WILL SEE 'things' DIFFERENTLY.

It doesn't even come out of itself, or returns to itself,

And this is BECAUSE 'It' IS thy 'Self'. ALWAYS, and in ALL WAYS.

except as illusory appearance and disappearance and reappearance of the same one energy pretending to be the many.

Thee One, Itself, does NOT 'pretend' ANY 'thing' AT ALL.

What is 'pretending' are 'you' characters who are acting on this stage, some call 'life'.

I agree with you popeye.

"dontaskme', "popeye", AND "lacewing" are in TOTAL AGREEMENT here. 'you' have ALL just learned words in Incorrect ways, and do NOT want to CHANGE. It is this STUBBORNNESS WHY 'you' can NOT SEE this IRREFUTABLE Truth, JUST YET anyway.

[Dontaskme]

"dontaskme', "popeye", AND "lacewing" are in TOTAL AGREEMENT here. 'you' have ALL just learned words in Incorrect ways, and do NOT want to CHANGE. It is this STUBBORNNESS WHY 'you' can NOT SEE this IRREFUTABLE Truth, JUST YET anyway.

No one sees the truth.

No one is/knows the truth.

Because that's the only knowing there is, and you are it.

[Age]

"dontaskme', "popeye", AND "lacewing" are in TOTAL AGREEMENT here. 'you' have ALL just learned words in Incorrect ways, and do NOT want to CHANGE. It is this STUBBORNNESS WHY 'you' can NOT SEE this IRREFUTABLE Truth, JUST YET anyway.

No one sees the truth.

No one is/knows the truth.

Because that's the only knowing there is, and you are it.

AGAIN, 'you', "dontaskme", USE the 'you' word as thought the "OTHER" 'you' is the ONLY One, which is Truly FUNNY to WATCH and OBSERVE 'you' DO.

[Dontaskme]

AGAIN, 'you', "dontaskme", USE the 'you' word as thought the "OTHER" 'you' is the ONLY One, which is Truly FUNNY to WATCH and OBSERVE 'you' DO.

The other is an image of the imageless, so yes, it's hilarious Age.

[Age]

AGAIN, 'you', "dontaskme", USE the 'you' word as thought the "OTHER" 'you' is the ONLY One, which is Truly FUNNY to WATCH and OBSERVE 'you' DO.

The other is an image of the imageless, so yes, it's hilarious Age.

There, OBVIOUSLY and LOGICALLY, can NOT be an IMAGE of 'that', which is, SUPPOSEDLY and ALLEGEDLY, IMAGE-LESS.

[Dontaskme]

There, OBVIOUSLY and LOGICALLY, can NOT be an IMAGE of 'that', which is, SUPPOSEDLY and ALLEGEDLY, IMAGE-LESS.

An image is inseparable from the seer and knower of the image.
While an image is clearly seen and known...
The Seer and Knower of the seen and known is never Seen nor Known...in this Unknowing Known.

This truth does not require any special intellect, logic or rationality to understand it. It's clearly self-evident.

In other words, one can say that CONSCIOUSNESS is imageless, and yet without consciousness there is no experience of seeing or knowing, as imaged.

[Age]

There, OBVIOUSLY and LOGICALLY, can NOT be an IMAGE of 'that', which is, SUPPOSEDLY and ALLEGEDLY, IMAGE-LESS.

An image is inseparable from the seer and knower of the image.
While an image is clearly seen and known...
The Seer and Knower of the seen and known is never Seen nor Known...in this Unknowing Known.

BUT the Seer AND Knower has ALREADY been Seen AND Known.

This IS just an IRREFUTABLE Fact, although very contradictory to the popular BELIEF of some 'fictional characters', in the days when this was being written.

This truth does not require any special intellect, logic or rationality to understand it. It's clearly self-evident.

But this is just ANOTHER 'fictional story' made up by the 'fictional character' Known here as "dontaskme".

In other words, one can say that CONSCIOUSNESS is imageless, and yet without consciousness there is no experience of seeing or knowing, as imaged.

But so-called CONSCIOUSNESS is ONLY so-called imageless BECAUSE 'it' IS an INVISIBLE 'thing'.