Reincarnation. Who or what would reincarnate? (explained)

Is the mind the same as the body? What is consciousness? Can machines have it?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Age
Posts: 5113
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Reincarnation. Who or what would reincarnate? (explained)

Post by Age »

surreptitious57 wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2020 2:32 am
Age wrote:
So what creates this mind ?
Mind is an emergent property of the brain but I would not say that the brain creates mind
To create something is not the same as to emerge from something like what happens here
So, if to you the mind is an emergent property of the brain but the brain can not do anything without the mind, then how do you explain this obvious contradiction?
Age
Posts: 5113
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Reincarnation. Who or what would reincarnate? (explained)

Post by Age »

Dontaskme wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2020 7:09 am
Age wrote: Wed Feb 19, 2020 11:45 pm Are you blind or do you just miss some words on purpose. I wrote; The HUMAN body.

You appear to really enjoy twisting and distorting what is said, in words, to fit in with and suit your own already held beliefs and assumptions.
I know you wrote the human body. But I just wanted to shorten it to (body) ..is that a crime now?
Twisting around and distorting what "another" is actually saying and meaning, for one's own benefit may not be a crime, but maybe it should be?
Dontaskme wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2020 7:09 am ..surely you must have known I was refering to a human body and not any other body. Or did you assume something else?
No I did not assume something else. I KNEW you were referring to a human body and not any other body. That is the very reason WHY I specifically wrote: Of course the human body can experience. Do you dispute this?

But, as usual, another clarifying question of mine was completely missed or deflected away from.
Dontaskme wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2020 7:09 am You TOO appear to really enjoy twisting and distorting what is said, in words, to fit in with and suit your own already held beliefs and assumptions...
You, once again, just made a claim. Now, are you going to back this claim up with anything?

What do you think or believe I have "twisted and distorted" in what you said?

And, what do you think or believe Is my own already held beliefs and assumptions?

I have suggested this a few time previously that if someone wants to make a claim, then it is better for them that they actually have some thing to back up and support their claim BEFORE they make the claim.

I have yet to see you back up and support one of your claims when I have pointed them out, so let us see if you will start doing it now?
Dontaskme wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2020 7:09 am you know, YOUR beliefs that you say you don't have
Express those so called "beliefs" that you appear to believe that I have.

If you do not, then what you are claiming here is really nothing at all.
Dontaskme wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2020 7:09 am ..but then find no problem projecting the belief that other people must HAVE beliefs, which is quite hysterical
Why do you find it so funny when "others" tell me that they MUST HAVE beliefs.

If you look through my writings you will NEVER see me saying this. So, once again, your claim here is really nothing at all, AGAIN.
Dontaskme wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2020 7:09 am ..I mean who is this OTHER ONE who is assumed to have beliefs by you, that you yourself do not believe you HAVE?
But thee 'I' does NOT believe this.

How many times does the 'you' have to be told some thing before 'it' can comprehend and understand?
Dontaskme wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2020 7:09 am ..can you see how words just divide and create a duality of you verses the other?
I can very easily SEE how this is exactly what the 'you' is doing here. But thee 'I' KNOWS how not to do this. This is because thee 'I' KNOWS ALL.
Dontaskme wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2020 7:09 am As a side note, whats with all the pedantics, can't you just simply KNOW what's being spoken about here, after all, you are thee (ALL KNOWING ONE...is that right?
Of course this is NOT right. How many times does the 'you' need to be told that the 'you' is NOT thee ALL KNOWING ONE?

Thee 'I' is thee ALL KNOWING One. Like 'I' have said previously the 'you' is NOT thee 'I', from my perspective.
Dontaskme wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2020 7:09 am or is it that you just really enjoy arguing with yourself all the time, pretending that there are others who dont know what they are talking about and that they have lots more to learn on this subject and until they are able to put this into words they will NEVER UNDERSTAND what they are saying.
1. The word 'argue' can mean 'logical reasoning'. So, Yes thee 'I' do enjoy 'arguing' or logical reasoning with thy Self. Finding the right words so that ALL-OF-THIS can be explained very simply and understood very easily, by 'you', human beings, very rewarding and fulfilling.

2. If 'you' had taken notice I use the word "others" is double quotation marks to express a thing that is not actually real.

3. 'you' are the one that has admitted that you do not know what you are talking about. Remember it is 'you' who BELIEVES and has incessantly maintained that 'this' can not be expressed in words. If 'you' are still unaware, not being able to express some thing in words directly relates to 'not knowing what 'you' are talking about'.

4. Does the 'you' really believe that there is not lots more to learn on this subject? Do 'you' really believe you already know all there is to know on this subject?

5. Is it not obvious to 'you' that until you are able to put 'this' into words then really "others" will never understand what 'you' are saying?
Dontaskme wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2020 7:09 am Is this how you entertain yourself, I guess it MUST be so alonely being THEE ALL KNOWING ONE
As far as I recall the second part of your statement is the most accurate guess you have made to date.
Dontaskme wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2020 7:09 am . . that you have to make up another ONE just so you can justify your need to explain yourself, I mean why would you need to explain yourself to yourself? if you already KNOW
But there is NO 'need' to. WHY do 'you' continually think or believe there is a 'need' here?
Dontaskme wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2020 7:09 am That's what I don't understand.
'you' do not understand this because you assume or believe some thing that does not even exist.

One 'you' free that 'self' of this assumption and/or belief, then I can start to explain things to you, in a very simple and easy way.
Dontaskme wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2020 7:09 am ...but as for the subject of ONENESS, I perfectly understand, and have no need to put that understanding into words, for it is KNOWN.
'I' already KNOW.

And, because I already PERFECTLY UNDERSTAND, then I also PERFECTLY already KNOW and UNDERSTAND in very simple and easy to explain and understand words.
Dontaskme wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2020 7:09 am But hey ho, do carry on with the game of human charades with yourself, dividing what cannot be divided through words, and is why words will never touch what is actually being talked about here.

.
But words have ALREADY UNIFIED what 'you' human beings have attempted to divide and separate.

Words can be used to separate and divide just as easily as be used to unite and conquer.
Age
Posts: 5113
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Reincarnation. Who or what would reincarnate? (explained)

Post by Age »

Dontaskme wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2020 7:25 am
Age wrote: Wed Feb 19, 2020 11:45 pm And, I also KNOW to you Consciousness is not a thing. This is how 'you' express in words what you say can not be expressed in words.
The whole point being made here is that CONSCIOUSNESS....does NOT NEED to be expressed in words to be able to understand it.
But WHY does the 'you' feel it necessary to express, in words, what is clearly ALREADY KNOWN and UNDERSTOOD.

'you' really do have an issue with this 'need' word, correct?

Of course Consciousness, Itself, does NOT 'need' to be expressed in words to be able to understand Its Self. Only 'you', human beings, need things to be expressed and explained in words for 'you' to comprehend and understand things like 'this'.
Dontaskme wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2020 7:09 am I'm not actually explaining CONSCIOUSNESS per-se
This is because 'you' are yet to fully comprehend and understand Consciousness, Itself. When 'you' do, then you will be able to actually explain Consciousness, in words, very simply and very easily, by the way, you will come to discover and learn.
Dontaskme wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2020 7:09 am ...I'm discussing the appearances of consciousness, not ACTUAL consciousness itself which is Nondual and cannot be touched using words without turning Nonduality into duality.
WHY do 'you' BELIEVE so strongly that 'I' Consciousness can not be "touched" understood and explained using words without turning 'I' into duality, like 'you'?

Where does this incessant BELIEF come from that 'you' just can not shake, get rid of, and/or let go of?
Dontaskme wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2020 7:09 am Why can't you just ACCEPT this ?
Because I ALREADY KNOW thee Truth of things. And, one of them is, ALL-OF-THIS can very simply be explained using words, which in fact SHOWS and PROVES just HOW thee one and only 'I' is living Consciousness, Itself.
Dontaskme wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2020 7:09 am I'm finished with the merry go round that is the world according to AGE..the groove is just so well worn now it's boring me to death.
'you' have said a few times ALREADY that 'you' are finished. But that incessant BELIEF within 'you' that keeps driving 'you' to keep telling "others" that 'this' can not be expressed and explained using words, keeps driving 'you' insane. So, 'you' have to keep coming back to keep yelling at "others" this can not be expressed using words.

I just KNOW 'you' are incorrect here.
Dontaskme wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2020 7:09 am Goodbye.

.
Oh, by the way, 'you', ONCE AGAIN, COMPLETELY FAILED to back up and support your claim that the question, Who am 'I'?' HAS BEEN ANSWERED, BY YOU, MANY TIMES, which you capitalized to make very clear.

I specifically asked you;
So, what is the answer to the question, 'Who am 'I'?'

And,

Let 'us' see if you can back up and support the claim the 'you' made here now?
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 8537
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: Reincarnation. Who or what would reincarnate? (explained)

Post by Dontaskme »

Age wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2020 8:27 amBut that incessant BELIEF within 'you' that keeps driving 'you' to keep telling "others" that 'this' cannot be expressed and explained using words, keeps driving 'you' insane.
The question ''Who am I'' does not even arise except to the illusory SENSE of self which does not exist as sense thinks or believes it does.
That's the answer to the illusory question.
The question ''Who am I'' relies on EXPERIENCE to be able to answer it.
Whatever that knows the experiences, does not come and go with the experiences. It does not share the limits of the objects that it knows. Rather attention is directed from whatever that is known to that which knows them "I"
When the question ''Who Am I'' arises, this feeling can be contemplated until that question no longer matters, and then there is a point of view of "I" where the point of view disolves. But it does not matter how many ways Dontaskme puts this....Age will still find a way to shoot it down...so be it. I don't really care, because it's what Age does.

As for the ''I'' This ''I'' is not an experience, ''I'' is the experiencing no separate ''I'' is having..

If you want to call my knowledge, insanity, then so be it, makes no difference to me what you believe about how this one here sees this. I don't believe what I am saying, I KNOW what I am saying...So,Nothing you say to me will change how I see this from my perspective. Just as you see it from your perpective. You just need to learn how to let go of judgment and accept another persons way of seeing it...just as you have your way, then so do others have theirs.

You simple cannot have your way and then deny other people their way....so I've returned to you to point this out to you.
To be honest discussing subjects with you is like walking through black treacle, it's very heavy and tedious and unpleasant.

But the reason I continue is because I am your match, and just like you I have to put my point accross to you, just as you have to put yours accross to me.

This conversation between both of us can be made very easy or it can be made very hard ....at the moment it's very hard, and sometimes I want to give up, but then I just think, why should I give up, so I carry on. I carry on not because it drives me insane, I carry on for the very SAME reason you do...which is you want to be RIGHT AND CORRECT...well don't we all?


Age wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2020 8:27 amSo, 'you' have to keep coming back to keep yelling at "others" this can not be expressed using words.

It cannot be expressed using words, in my opinion, why can't you just accept that?


You cannot so 'you' have to keep coming back to keep yelling at "others" aka me, that this CAN be expressed using words in your opinion. So are you only allowed to have your opinion now, while others are not allowed to have theirs?


But do I care about your opinion? the answer is absolutely NO..no matter how much you keep ramming it down my throat.
Every one lives in their OWN universe that is unique to them, a universe that no other universe can EVER experience, penetrate or get a handle on because each finite part of infinity is a unique infinity within infinity itself...add infinitum.

It's clearly obvious that what ever Dontaskme says to Age .....Age will dispute it anyway, so our discussion is pointless everytime we attempt to engage. Nothing can be done about that...except to wait for the echo and try and find some common ground, where maybe, just maybe somewhere we can meet up and discover we are actually sharing the same space, and breathing the same air.


.
surreptitious57
Posts: 4217
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Reincarnation. Who or what would reincarnate? (explained)

Post by surreptitious57 »

Age wrote:
if to you the mind is an emergent property of the brain but the brain can not do
anything without the mind then how do you explain this obvious contradiction ?
I would not say that there is a contradiction
A brain can exist without mind but will not be able to function as it will be dead
For mind is the emergent property of the brain that allows the brain to function
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 8537
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: Reincarnation. Who or what would reincarnate? (explained)

Post by Dontaskme »

Age wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2020 8:11 am
But words have ALREADY UNIFIED what 'you' human beings have attempted to divide and separate.

Words can be used to separate and divide just as easily as be used to unite and conquer.
The MIND is like ''scissors'' that can cut a whole piece of cloth into two halves.
The scissors CANNOT be used to put those two pieces of cloth together again.

And yet there is no need to put together what CAN NEVER be parted.

Any division is simply ILLUSORY...believed to be REAL within the dream of separation, an illusion.

In other words, there is nothing dividing or separating, or putting itself back together here, except SELF itself....it's a zero sum game, it plays with itself ALL ALONE - ALL ONE

A tree is the SELF...but the tree never tells itself it is a tree....knowledge aka words only INFORM the illusory nature of reality.
Therefore, words are not WHAT the SELF is...except in this ARTIFICAL CONCEPTION...aka THE BELIEF

.
Age
Posts: 5113
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Reincarnation. Who or what would reincarnate? (explained)

Post by Age »

Dontaskme wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:33 am
Age wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2020 8:27 amBut that incessant BELIEF within 'you' that keeps driving 'you' to keep telling "others" that 'this' cannot be expressed and explained using words, keeps driving 'you' insane.
The question ''Who am I'' does not even arise except to the illusory SENSE of self which does not exist as sense thinks or believes it does.
Remember it was 'you', that 'self', which insisted that the question 'Who am 'I'?' HAS BEEN ANSWERED, BY ME, MANY TIMES.

So, in the illusory SENSE of 'self' that 'you' must of asked the question, 'Who am 'I'?' MANY TIMES, if as you say, it HAS BEEN ANSWERED, BY YOU, MANY TIMES.

So, this implies or infers that you think or believe that 'you' exist.
Dontaskme wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:33 am That's the answer to the illusory question.
So, 'you' ask the same question MANY TIMES to answer that answer MANY TIMES, okay this is understood.
Dontaskme wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:33 am The question ''Who am I'' relies on EXPERIENCE to be able to answer it.
If you say so, okay.
Dontaskme wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:33 am Whatever that knows the experiences, does not come and go with the experiences. It does not share the limits of the objects that it knows. Rather attention is directed from whatever that is known to that which knows them "I"
When the question ''Who Am I'' arises, this feeling can be contemplated until that question no longer matters, and then there is a point of view of "I" where the point of view disolves. But it does not matter how many ways Dontaskme puts this....Age will still find a way to shoot it down...so be it. I don't really care, because it's what Age does.
This is because the one known as "age" (small s) knows who and what that small one 'self' is, as well as who and what thee True big One 'Self' is.
Dontaskme wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:33 am As for the ''I'' This ''I'' is not an experience, ''I'' is the experiencing no separate ''I'' is having..
If you want to call my knowledge, insanity, then so be it, makes no difference to me what you believe about how this one here sees this.

Why can 'you' not comprehend and understand that 'I' neither believe or disbelieve any thing?

If you want to express to either 'us' or thy 'Self' that 'this' can not be explained nor understood in words, then so be it, but this is not the knowledge held by thee One KNOWING 'I'.
Dontaskme wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:33 am I don't believe what I am saying, I KNOW what I am saying...
So, 'you' KNOW that what you are saying can not be explained nor understood in words, correct?
Dontaskme wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:33 am So,Nothing you say to me will change how I see this from my perspective.
GREAT and PERFECT. The more 'you' HOLD onto your own knowledge as being absolutely true and can not see what I am saying, from that perspective is exactly what 'I' want 'you' to do. The less the 'you' listen to thee 'I', then the more evidence is being provided of how the brain and the belief system works, and more evidence of just how strong the belief system has over 'you', human beings.

'I' only want 'you' to accept and agree with those things that 'you' accept and agree with voluntarily, for and by the self and thy Self.
Dontaskme wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:33 am Just as you see it from your perpective. You just need to learn how to let go of judgment and accept another persons way of seeing it...just as you have your way, then so do others have theirs.
Since when I have not accepted "another" person's way of seeing things? I am just informing 'you' that when 'you' tell me or "others" that we can not do some thing that 'I' can do it. Especially considering I KNOW how to do it, and that it is an extremely very simple and very easy thing to do, then I will just informing you that what you say can not be done can be done.

I have understood EVERY one's way of seeing ALL things from the outset of joining this forum. I have made it specifically clear that I truly understand the way you are seeing things and I do not judge this because I KNOW each persons way of seeing things and how and why each person looks at and sees things 'differently', the way they do. I have also advised when 'you' discover or learn how the Mind and the brain works also, then 'you' also will KNOW and UNDERSTAND 'this'.

Dontaskme wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:33 am You simple cannot have your way and then deny other people their way....so I've returned to you to point this out to you.
What exactly do you think or believe that I am saying things that is "my way" and denying other people "their way"?

Do you keep forgetting that it is 'you' TELLING "others" that 'this' can not be explained in words, and that it is 'you' who is expecting EVERY one to accept and agree with this?

All I am doing is saying that you telling us that we can not do some thing, which I already KNOW can be done, is obviously not correct.

Once you STOP telling "others" that they can not explain and understand 'this' in words, then I will STOP saying that this actually can be done, and STOP informing you that it is really an extremely simple and easy thing to do in fact.
Dontaskme wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:33 am To be honest discussing subjects with you is like walking through black treacle, it's very heavy and tedious and unpleasant.
Well do you know what some people say in regards to; Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result?
Dontaskme wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:33 am But the reason I continue is because I am your match, and just like you I have to put my point accross to you, just as you have to put yours accross to me.
But do you have any idea at all what 'my point' is exactly?

If yes, then what is it?
Dontaskme wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:33 am This conversation between both of us can be made very easy or it can be made very hard ....at the moment it's very hard, and sometimes I want to give up, but then I just think, why should I give up, so I carry on.
Why does this conversation appear very hard to you. To me, this conversation is extremely very simple and very easy indeed.
Dontaskme wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:33 am I carry on not because it drives me insane, I carry on for the very SAME reason you do...which is you want to be RIGHT AND CORRECT...well don't we all?
Is that 'we all', which that 'you' is asking 'we all' want to be RIGHT and CORRECT, the separate and individual small human being selves?

Anyway, I do NOT want to be RIGHT and CORRECT. 'I' already KNOW what IS RIGHT and CORRECT.

I KNOW how to reach what IS True, Right, and Correct.
I KNOW how to explain 'this', very simply and very easily.
I also KNOW that 'this' is also very simple and very easy to understand.

Only 'you', human beings 'want' to be RIGHT and CORRECT. That is why 'you', adult human beings, express in the way 'you' all do, that is; as though what they say is the absolutely true, without clarifying what the "other" is actually saying and meaning.
Dontaskme wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:33 am
Age wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2020 8:27 amSo, 'you' have to keep coming back to keep yelling at "others" this can not be expressed using words.

It cannot be expressed using words, in my opinion, why can't you just accept that?
I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND that this can not be expressed using words, IN YOUR OPINION. I have said this, and made this clear, MANY TIMES ALREADY.

I have just been waiting for 'you' to say this, and MAKE IT CLEAR, ALSO.

'It', 'this', or 'ALL-OF-THIS' not being able to be expressed using words IS what you say and believe or know to be true, to you.

'It', 'this', or 'ALL-OF-THIS' being able to be expressed using words IS what I say and KNOW to be True. I KNOW this because I understand 'it', 'this', or 'ALL-OF-THIS' in words. Therefore, if 'I' can understand 'this' in words, then I KNOW using words can also explain 'this'. I KNOW this can be done very very easily because of the very simple words that is only needed to explain this.

Just discovering how to get around the belief-system within adult human beings, so that expressing 'ALL-OF-THIS' in a very simple and easy to be understood way, just takes some learning.

One issue with the belief-system is when trying to explain that a belief is not actually true, right, nor correct, then the more the belief can all to easily be held onto more and made stronger by one's self.
Dontaskme wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:33 am You cannot so 'you' have to keep coming back to keep yelling at "others" aka me, that this CAN be expressed using words in your opinion. So are you only allowed to have your opinion now, while others are not allowed to have theirs?
I have absolutely no idea what you trying to get at and/or deflecting away from.

My view is 'this' or 'ALL-OF-THIS' can be expressed and explained and understood using words. I am not sure how this view relates to whatever it is that you are trying to express and say here.

Dontaskme wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:33 am But do I care about your opinion? the answer is absolutely NO..no matter how much you keep ramming it down my throat.
Are you even aware that I only say that 'ALL-OF-THIS- can be expressed and explained using words AFTER you keep "ramming down out throats" that 'this' can NOT be expressed and explained using words.

I do NOT care if any one agrees with me or not. Did you forget that it is 'you' who keeps insisting and telling us that we can not do some thing and that it is 'you' who wants us to BELIEVE and ACCEPT what 'you' say is the absolute and indisputable Truth?
Dontaskme wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:33 am Every one lives in their OWN universe that is unique to them, a universe that no other universe can EVER experience, penetrate or get a handle on because each finite part of infinity is a unique infinity within infinity itself...add infinitum.
If you say so, okay.

As long as 'you' in whatever 'universe' you say or believe you are in are not telling me or others that we can not do some thing, then all is well and good.
Dontaskme wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:33 am It's clearly obvious that what ever Dontaskme says to Age .....Age will dispute it anyway, so our discussion is pointless everytime we attempt to engage.
Will you list the things that you say I dispute in regards to what you say?

If you do not, then this will be just another example of you making a claim but then not backing up nor supporting that claim with any thing.

Also, the claim that "It is clearly obvious that what ever you say I will dispute anyway" is OBVIOUSLY False, Wrong, and Incorrect.
Dontaskme wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:33 am Nothing can be done about that...except to wait for the echo and try and find some common ground, where maybe, just maybe somewhere we can meet up and discover we are actually sharing the same space, and breathing the same air.


.
Now, 'you' are starting to SEE things 'My way'.
Age
Posts: 5113
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Reincarnation. Who or what would reincarnate? (explained)

Post by Age »

surreptitious57 wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:59 am
Age wrote:
if to you the mind is an emergent property of the brain but the brain can not do
anything without the mind then how do you explain this obvious contradiction ?
I would not say that there is a contradiction
A brain can exist without mind but will not be able to function as it will be dead

What will not be able to function, as it will be dead?

For mind is the emergent property of the brain that allows the brain to function
So again, to me, it appears contradictory to say the mind is the emergent property of the brain, but it is the mind that allows the brain to function.

How could a brain function in the first place if it is the mind, which allows the brain to function, is also the emergent property of the brain?

A mind could not emerge until the brain was functioning, but if the brain only functions because of the mind, then, to me, this is extremely contradictory.

Can you really not see the contradiction here?
Age
Posts: 5113
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Reincarnation. Who or what would reincarnate? (explained)

Post by Age »

Dontaskme wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 9:06 am
Age wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2020 8:11 am
But words have ALREADY UNIFIED what 'you' human beings have attempted to divide and separate.

Words can be used to separate and divide just as easily as be used to unite and conquer.
The MIND is like ''scissors'' that can cut a whole piece of cloth into two halves.
What exactly IS this 'MIND' thing, which 'you' talk about here?

And how exactly does this MIND thing, cut a whole piece of cloth into two halves?
Dontaskme wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 9:06 am The scissors CANNOT be used to put those two pieces of cloth together again.
So what?

What was it that invented, devised, and created the cloth and the scissors in the beginning?

Could those two things have come from a Truly OPEN Mind, which was able to imagine and create those things to start with?
Dontaskme wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 9:06 am And yet there is no need to put together what CAN NEVER be parted.
But you just said some things can be parted into two halves.
Dontaskme wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 9:06 am Any division is simply ILLUSORY...believed to be REAL within the dream of separation, an illusion.
So, your example of scissors being able to part cloth into two halves is also just simply ILLUSORY, believed to be REAL, within the dream of separation, an illusion that 'you', your self, just made up and believed is REAL and True.
Dontaskme wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 9:06 am In other words, there is nothing dividing or separating, or putting itself back together here, except SELF itself....it's a zero sum game, it plays with itself ALL ALONE - ALL ONE
This playing with its self appears to be exactly what 'you' are doing here.

See, 'you' could NEVER be able to SEE and UNDERSTAND 'this' using words because then that would absolutely DESTROY your strongly held belief here. So, 'you' will just keep playing with your self and going from one perspective to the exact opposite perspective so that 'you' could NEVER SEE the actual Truth of things here.

If 'you' started understanding, then your BELIEF is absolutely False, Wrong, and Incorrect so, as "others" have already pointed out to you, 'you' will change the way you look at and see things, and just say the exact opposite of what you were just expressing previously.

Your BELIEF makes you say things so that they can not be expressed and explained using words. 'you' will always contradict your own 'self', so that your own BELIEF becomes the Truth of things, to you.
Dontaskme wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 9:06 am A tree is the SELF...but the tree never tells itself it is a tree....
This is because a tree is NOT a self, and a tree does not even talk anyway.
Dontaskme wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 9:06 am knowledge aka words only INFORM the illusory nature of reality.
If this was true, then this "knowledge" aka words just expressed here are only INFORMING the illusory nature of reality.

Therefore, the True and Real nature of reality is the EXACT OPPOSITE of these words that you just expressed.
Dontaskme wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 9:06 am Therefore, words are not WHAT the SELF is...except in this ARTIFICAL CONCEPTION...aka THE BELIEF

.

Of course words are NOT what the self is.

Words are just words.

Words are just used by human beings (and NOT trees) to inform, (or form with-in if you are interested in looking at this from another perspective).
surreptitious57
Posts: 4217
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Reincarnation. Who or what would reincarnate? (explained)

Post by surreptitious57 »

Age post wrote:
surreptitious57 wrote:
Age wrote:
if to you the mind is an emergent property of the brain but the brain can not do
anything without the mind then how do you explain this obvious contradiction ?
I would not say that there is a contradiction
A brain can exist without mind but will not be able to function as it will be dead
For mind is the emergent property of the brain that allows the brain to function
So again to me it appears contradictory to say the mind is the emergent property of the brain but it is the mind that allows the brain to function
As we are both repeating ourselves and cannot get beyond this point then we will have to leave it there for now
But there definitely needs to be much greater clarity with language with regard to this for any future discussion
Age
Posts: 5113
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Reincarnation. Who or what would reincarnate? (explained)

Post by Age »

surreptitious57 wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 11:00 am
Age post wrote:
surreptitious57 wrote:

I would not say that there is a contradiction
A brain can exist without mind but will not be able to function as it will be dead
For mind is the emergent property of the brain that allows the brain to function
So again to me it appears contradictory to say the mind is the emergent property of the brain but it is the mind that allows the brain to function
As we are both repeating ourselves and cannot get beyond this point then we will have to leave it there for now
But there definitely needs to be much greater clarity with language with regard to this for any future discussion
Well obviously there is a contradiction there from what you say.

If you want clarity with regard to 'this', then just explain what 'this' is, and then I can explain with absolute clarity, in a very simple and easy way.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 3206
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: Reincarnation. Who or what would reincarnate? (explained)

Post by bahman »

Age wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 10:33 am
surreptitious57 wrote: Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:59 am
Age wrote:
if to you the mind is an emergent property of the brain but the brain can not do
anything without the mind then how do you explain this obvious contradiction ?
I would not say that there is a contradiction
A brain can exist without mind but will not be able to function as it will be dead

What will not be able to function, as it will be dead?

For mind is the emergent property of the brain that allows the brain to function
So again, to me, it appears contradictory to say the mind is the emergent property of the brain, but it is the mind that allows the brain to function.

How could a brain function in the first place if it is the mind, which allows the brain to function, is also the emergent property of the brain?

A mind could not emerge until the brain was functioning, but if the brain only functions because of the mind, then, to me, this is extremely contradictory.

Can you really not see the contradiction here?
You, Age, are correct with your observation.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 8537
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: Reincarnation. Who or what would reincarnate? (explained)

Post by Dontaskme »

AGE:
Now, 'you' are starting to SEE things 'My way'.
No, I only See things ‘My way’

As for the rest of your opinionated responses to yourself....no one cares.
surreptitious57
Posts: 4217
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Reincarnation. Who or what would reincarnate? (explained)

Post by surreptitious57 »

Age wrote:
If you want clarity with regard to this then just explain what this and then I can explain with absolute clarity in a very simple and easy way
Explain with absolute clarity what the brain does and leaving no detail out while you do so so I fully understand
Explain also what Mind is to you and why you are absolutely certain that it is true and real in an objective sense
I will not give any further clarification because I want to see how far you can go without any more input from me
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 8537
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: Reincarnation. Who or what would reincarnate? (explained)

Post by Dontaskme »

AGE:
Well do you know what some people say in regards to; Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result
Yes I do know ..and that is why you will never receive another reply, response or post or whatever, from me ever again on this forum.

Have a nice life. I wish you well.

.
Post Reply