The collective of 'we' is 'I'. I, Consciousness, KNOW exactly what 'I', Consciousness, am. Just because 'you' does NOT YET know, does NOT mean that "others" do not ALREADY KNOW.Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Dec 15, 2019 1:25 pm''We'' aka Consciousness cannot know what Consciousness is. ''We'' aka Consciousness can only be ITSteveKlinko wrote: ↑Sun Dec 15, 2019 12:24 pmI don't know what contorted logic leads you to the conclusion that I know what Consciousness is. When I say that Consciousness cannot be measured it implies that nobody knows what Consciousness is. The day that somebody discovers how to measure Consciousness will be the day that we will know what Consciousness is and will have solved the Hard Problem.
Are 'you' even able to understand this?
And, as I say, When 'you' STOP believing things and start LOOKING AT things FROM thee Truly Open Mind, instead of from the already held BELIEFS withing that body, then 'you' will also start SEEING and UNDERSTANDING thee actual Truth of things as well.
Instead, at the moment, 'you' are only seeing your own personal distorted version of Reality and Truth.
This infers that the little one known as "dontaskme" KNOWS forever more what is and what is not possible, which also means that that individual 'one' also KNOWS what will and will NOT happen for eternity.
Besides this, saying 'we' can only BE 'knowing consciousness', but without knowing some things is so contradictory funny that it would be a joke if it was not actually believed to be true.
WHY does the one "dontaskme" HAVE TO add the word 'nothing' when the word 'everything is used?
If some thing like; Consciousness is the singularity that is Everything together as One, was said, ("without a second" is unnecessary), then does that not just stand up on its own, without needed any support at all to be understood?
When 'you' use the 'nothing' word, then I wonder what 'you' are talking about, and then want to ask 'you', What do you mean when 'you' use the 'nothing' word here?
Does it seem very contradictory that Consciousness uses words to say that nothing can be said because anything said is part of the same singular Consciousness?
If yes, then WHY say this "stuff"? WHY say things like; "Words cannot explain things"?
WHY would Consciousness or any thing spend so much time telling Its Self that there is NO use in using words?
Just for your information to the one known as "dontaskme", and contrary to your person BELIEF, the ALL-Knowing single identity known as Consciousness KNOWS how to explain ALL-OF-THIS in very simple terms, and with very easy to understand WORDS, so that every one of 'you', adult human beings, are able to grasp onto, learn, and understand this KNOWING as well. However, to do this accurately and properly it just takes some time to learn how to communicate with 'you', human beings, better.
Since Consciousness has only Self-realized in relatively no time at all, in just a very short period ago, learning now the RIGHT words to use to help ALL of 'you', adult human beings, to become the more curious and naturally inquisitive one's that 'you' ALL used to be, so that 'you' will become the Truly wise ones that 'you' are meant to BE just takes some time.
BELIEVING things are NOT possible or can NOT be done only SLOWS this process down considerably.
AND, EVERY time a 'you', like 'you', "dontaskme", uses the word 'you' are pointing out and SHOWING that there is an "other", which contradicts what 'you' say about there only BEING One.
This is TOTALLY UNDERSTANDABLE because 'you' are continually being taught, WRONGLY by the way, to BELIEVE that there is NO 'I'.
Now, there is obviously NO 'I' from an individual separate identity sense of 'I',
But, there is obviously AN individual, singular, non-separated, non-dual One, which is the One and only Real and True 'I'. This True Self IS just the collective of EVERY thing. This Self is Consciousness, or just plain old God.
This I is best NEVER to be confused with those separate human beings who identify "themselves" and misrepresent "themselves" as 'I'.
When 'you' explain WHY 'you' use the words 'no thing' then this will be better understood.
By the way, the words 'nothing' and 'no thing' do need to used to have ALL-OF-THIS FULLY explained and FULLY understood. But I am just curious to WHY you use those words and in what context.
Obviously there is nothing that NEEDS to be known. So, STOP assuming that every one ASSUMES there does. Obviously there is nothing that HAS TO be known. ALL animals, and brand new born human beings, are quite happy just living and BEing, without necessarily 'knowing' any thing at all. But because of human nature, human beings are born institutionally WANTING and DESIRING to discover and learn. Therefore, human beings collectively do NOT stop learning, and discovering, and understanding, and gaining more and more knowledge. This, however, is especially so in the young but unfortunately can all to quickly disappear to quickly as they age. (Also, there is just a much quicker and much simpler way of gaining knowledge and becoming wiser than the way human beings do it now, in the days of when this is written. Also, the ability to be able to distinguish between the true and right knowledge from the false and wrong knowledge almost immediately can also be gained much quicker as well).
Now, that we have SEEN the obvious FACT that nothing HAS TO known, including Consciousness Itself, then now we can LOOK TO the other obvious FACT, and that IS; Just because some thing does not necessarily have to be known does NOT take away from the FACT that 'it' could ALREADY be KNOWN, which, as I keep telling 'you' IT is ALREADY KNOWN.
That is; What Consciousness IS is ALREADY KNOWN. Do I make thy Self clear enough NOW?
Do you FULLY comprehend that just because one person does NOT YET know some thing, then that in NO way infers that that thing is NOT YET ALREADY known by some one else?
Also, do you understand that just because some one thinks that some thing can NEVER become known this in NO way means that this has absolutely any truth at all to it?
I will TELL you AGAIN, things like; What is Consciousness, God, Mind, Love, et cetera, and How do all these things work and work together are ALREADY KNOWN, and can be explained in very simple and easy to understand terms. ALL-OF-THIS is, literally, very easy to understand, and explain. But, ONLY to those that are interested, curious, and keen to learn and understand ALL-OF-THIS.
I KNOW that this is contrary to popular belief, in the days of when this is written, but it is still a FACT, which can not be disputed.
And all of this sounds like those ones known as "priests" have sounded like for centuries now. That is; they tell you you have to BELIEVE that God is true, because It IS. And, whenever questioned about what God is or how God creates things and/or everything, then that one will tell you that there are just some things that are not meant to be known.Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun Dec 15, 2019 1:25 pmLet us compare Consciousness to something simple like a stick. We can say that the stick has a centre and two ends. The centre and the two ends are a way of conceptually dividing the stick - which can be great for practical purposes - but in actuality the centre and the two ends have no existence apart from the stick. We cannot remove them from the stick to end up with two separate ends without a centre, and a centre without two ends.
Same applies to Consciousness. IT can be conceptually divided in the perceiver, the perceiving and the perceived, but again this is all knowledge already couched within the singularity that is Consciousness knowing all ONE...Oneness cannot step outside of itself, no more than it can lift itself up by it's own bootstraps or jump over it's own shadow, for where ego I go infinitely for eternity, nowhere, now here always.
That one known as "dontaskme" keeps telling us we have to BELIEVE non duality is ALL-THERE-IS, and that Consciousness exists, but when asked what Consciousness is and how non duality actually exists, then "dontaskme" tells us these things can not be explained in words and thus can not be known.
The resemblance is striking.
Now, the difference between 'I' from those of 'you' like that is I can actually explain and prove True what I claim, and I would certain NEVER tell 'you' to believe what I say. In fact I say the very opposite and say remain Open and SEE for "yourself" if it is True or not. Never take my word alone for any thing I say. After all i could be completely WRONG.