time to take the finger off the ignition switch

[Dontaskme]

Do THOUGHTS think?

Yes, because they are unsure.

What else could thought/s do?

The thinking is the thinker itself.

So can the thinker be known?

[Dontaskme]

I am the mind is a thought.

I am God is a thought.

Ken: ''By the way you did not answer my question. Can you spot and what was the difference?''

Is there any difference between the thinker and the thought? No, no difference that I can spot.

[ken]

Ken did.

NO i DID NOT.

You really need to READ to understand.

First I asked a question.
Second I asked how do you know that I do not KNOW that the Mind exists eternally.....

Asking how do you know that IS NOT saying that I know that....

Can you understand now?

Then why did you ask it?

For clarification, obviously. Unlike you, as explained countless times, I do not like to assume.

Also your whole theory is based on the 'I' and I which you claim are two different things.

YOU REALLY DO NOT READ, DO YOU?

Making an assumption and jumping to a conclusion has left you looking stupid, once again.

The 'I' and the 'i' are different. Now can you spot the difference?

There is nothing to suggest that 'I' and I are different.

The one in quotation marks is to signify what that one is in relation to with the following words after it in italics, if I use them, otherwise it is used to make sure that the words coming from this 'I' is not necessarily a human point of view.

If you instead of making assumptions and believing things you asked for clarification then you would know what 'I' am doing here now.

You BELIEVE so without any proof. You take that to be a truth on which you base all your theory, isn't it?

Was it or was is it not 'you' who said that I do not know the basics about theories and/or hypothesis's, and that a hypothesis can not be challenged?

Yet this is exactly what you are continually trying to do here. Make assumptions about what you think I am writing about, and believe so strongly in those assumptions so you can not stop yourself of wanting to prove what you have no idea what i am going to write about wrong. A complete waste of time and energy on your part, 'I' must say.

I have said and you have even said wait till 'My' story/theory is finished so that you can then see the proof.

[Dontaskme]

Are you afraid of something?

By the way 'My', God's, definition of 'human drama' could be completely different than 'yours'. Just like is the case with most of the words humans use. They use words like they KNOW exactly what they mean but when questioned for clarification human beings have a tendency to hide behind that brain, and then do some thing like exactly what you are doing now.

Maybe the person can't help what they say or do, maybe it's got Asperger syndrome...or a severe kind of Autism.

[ken]

Do THOUGHTS think?

Yes, because they are unsure.

What else could thought/s do?

The thinking is the thinker itself.

So can the thinker be known?

YES as i have told and explained to you many times before.

Thoughts/thinking is a person held within a brain. You are right in that the thinker person can not know its self. But this can and is known by the Mind, which is NOT a thinker but a KNOWER. A 'knower' of ALL things, by the way. The 'knower' can and does know the thinker but the thinker can not know the knower.

The Mind is NOT the brain nor the thinker within the brain. The Mind is able to see and know all of this, including what Its Self is.

'You' the person is unable to see and know this because you are blinded by and prevented from seeing and knowing the Truth by your own beliefs, as explained already.

Those beliefs keep 'you' as a 'thinker', never really 'knowing', for sure. What 'you' believe actually blocks you and keeps you from un-covering and dis-covering this and ALL Truth.

[ken]

I am the mind is a thought.

I am God is a thought.

Ken: ''By the way you did not answer my question. Can you spot and what was the difference?''

Is there any difference between the thinker and the thought? No, no difference that I can spot.

HOW quickly you have turned this around already. Do you know you do this purposely or is it just something that stupidly happens?

My question was: "By the way you did not answer my question. Can you spot and what was the difference?' Was in relation to:

'I' am the Mind.

'i' am thoughts (and feelings).

You have turned this around and related my question to your own answers. You have done this either to ignore my question, because you are so blind, or you are trying to side step the issue. Either way it is a very stupid thing to do.

Can you at least try to answer my question and what it is in relation to NOW. Can you spot and what is the difference between:

'I' am the Mind. And,

'i' am thoughts (and feelings).

A clue was in my last post.

By the way do 'you' dontaskme and sthitapragya KNOW that I am using both of you two as evidence to prove what I have been saying all along, i.e., if you have and maintain a belief, then you are not open to learn more, nor the Truth. You are both on either end of the spectrum in relation to what you believe (in), so it is great being able to use both of you here as proof and evidence of how the Mind and the brain actually work. Our discussions in these writings in this forum will prove and is all that will be needed for future generations to fully understand 'My' (so called) "Theory".

[ken]

Are you afraid of something?

By the way 'My', God's, definition of 'human drama' could be completely different than 'yours'. Just like is the case with most of the words humans use. They use words like they KNOW exactly what they mean but when questioned for clarification human beings have a tendency to hide behind that brain, and then do some thing like exactly what you are doing now.

Maybe the person can't help what they say or do, maybe it's got Asperger syndrome...or a severe kind of Autism.

Or, just maybe the only thing its got is a belief, which is holding them back.

Asperger or any autism syndrome is easy to spot and notice.

The people who believe they are right are the ones I am talking about.

NOW, if you want to play a game of "human drama", which I am totally ready to play, then let us play.

But what does 'human drama" mean to you here first?

[sthitapragya]

NO i DID NOT.

You really need to READ to understand.

First I asked a question.
Second I asked how do you know that I do not KNOW that the Mind exists eternally.....

Asking how do you know that IS NOT saying that I know that....

It implies that you KNOW. If you did not know and I assumed that you did not know, we would both be in agreement and I would be right and you would not have questioned me.

The fact that you questioned me implies you KNOW and I don't know. I just made the wrong assumption that you did not know.

YOU REALLY DO NOT READ, DO YOU?


Making an assumption and jumping to a conclusion has left you looking stupid, once again.

The 'I' and the 'i' are different. Now can you spot the difference?

I see the difference in upper and lower case. But that does not say anything at all.

There is nothing to suggest that 'I' and I are different.

The one in quotation marks is to signify what that one is in relation to with the following words after it in italics, if I use them, otherwise it is used to make sure that the words coming from this 'I' is not necessarily a human point of view.

If you instead of making assumptions and believing things you asked for clarification then you would know what 'I' am doing here now.

No. I don't. Because I told you to come up with different words for 'I',I, 'i' and i. Till now, from what I saw, you only used 'I' and I. Now there is 'i' to confuse the issue further. Just make words for them. Please.

You BELIEVE so without any proof. You take that to be a truth on which you base all your theory, isn't it?

Was it or was is it not 'you' who said that I do not know the basics about theories and/or hypothesis's, and that a hypothesis can not be challenged?

Yet this is exactly what you are continually trying to do here. Make assumptions about what you think I am writing about, and believe so strongly in those assumptions so you can not stop yourself of wanting to prove what you have no idea what i am going to write about wrong. A complete waste of time and energy on your part, 'I' must say.

I have said and you have even said wait till 'My' story/theory is finished so that you can then see the proof.

Well, what you accuse me of, I accuse you of. You have converted your hypothesis to a conclusion, making it a belief. I can show you if you come up with different words for the various kinds of I that you use. Do that, and we will discuss this again.

Right now, if I say I you say you meant 'I' and if I say 'I' you say you meant I. I have no idea what which means when. So make a word for each and stick by it. The we will start a new discussion.

And till you give the proof, we have to assume that it is your belief.

[Dontaskme]

[

Those beliefs keep 'you' as a 'thinker', never really 'knowing', for sure. What 'you' believe actually blocks you and keeps you from un-covering and dis-covering this and ALL Truth.

Soooo, stripped of every belief, and thought..therein lies the truth hidden in plain sight ..right?


So the truth can be known but not by i

[Dontaskme]

My question was: "By the way you did not answer my question. Can you spot and what was the difference?' Was in relation to:

'I' am the Mind.

'i' am thoughts (and feelings).


Can you at least try to answer my question and what it is in relation to NOW. Can you spot and what is the difference between:

'I' am the Mind. And,

'i' am thoughts (and feelings).

The only difference I can think of is that...

i am thoughts and feelings is a belief

I am the mind is not a belief

Our discussions in these writings in this forum will prove and is all that will be needed for future generations to fully understand 'My' (so called) "Theory".

You can't turn what is not a theory into a theory. That's not how real truth is found.

[Dontaskme]

Are you afraid of something?

By the way 'My', God's, definition of 'human drama' could be completely different than 'yours'. Just like is the case with most of the words humans use. They use words like they KNOW exactly what they mean but when questioned for clarification human beings have a tendency to hide behind that brain, and then do some thing like exactly what you are doing now.

Maybe the person can't help what they say or do, maybe it's got Asperger syndrome...or a severe kind of Autism.

Or, just maybe the only thing its got is a belief, which is holding them back.

Asperger or any autism syndrome is easy to spot and notice.

The people who believe they are right are the ones I am talking about.

NOW, if you want to play a game of "human drama", which I am totally ready to play, then let us play.

But what does 'human drama" mean to you here first?

Dear ken, I want to be your friend. I've changed my mind about you ..and didn't mean the things I said when I thought you were a bit controlling. Shall we be kind to each other from now on...and get on, and play nicely. I want to learn and be open to what it is you are saying.

Human drama means to me... I don't actually know, I just made it up... ...and that's being totally honest...

Or maybe human drama is about wanting to be right all the time and in doing so it's getting into all sorts of mental mind games with others to prove their point..of who they think and believe is right or wrong...or something like that..

I find it sad and a pity that sthitapragya can't find it in his heart to be more welcoming and accepting of other peoples shortcomings on his own thread.

I don't care if people want to call me a moron, because I don't believe it, I already know the real truth of me.

attofishpi thinks dontaskme is a moron...but that's ok I can take it.

[ken]

NO i DID NOT.

You really need to READ to understand.

First I asked a question.
Second I asked how do you know that I do not KNOW that the Mind exists eternally.....

Asking how do you know that IS NOT saying that I know that....

It implies that you KNOW.

It does not imply anything at all. The basis for my writings, if you have not noticed, is in asking clarifying questions. How you could not notice this is further evidence of the blocking power of beliefs. I have asked for clarifying questions enough times already for this to be noticed already surely. Also, another basis for my writings is the obvious mistakes that are made in making assumptions. The two reasons I am here is to use people as evidence to prove how the Mind and the brain works and how the belief system works preventing people from seeing, learning, understanding and reasoning, and, to learn how to express better. The former reason is already accomplished but in order to keep learning I will stay here, for now.

If you did not know and I assumed that you did not know, we would both be in agreement and I would be right and you would not have questioned me.

I was just asking out of sheer clarity.

The fact that you questioned me implies you KNOW and I don't know. I just made the wrong assumption that you did not know.

Again, your continually furthering of evidence that you are providing for NOT making assumptions is working perfectly for my proof. Thank you.

Also, asking a clarifying question CERTAINLY DOES NOT imply anything other than what it actually is, i.e., a question posed for clarification.

The trouble with human beings is they assume way too much.

Do people ever stop and wonder why there is so much conflict, disagreeing, fighting, etc. in the world? One major reason is because of assumptions being made all the time.

YOU REALLY DO NOT READ, DO YOU?


Making an assumption and jumping to a conclusion has left you looking stupid, once again.

The 'I' and the 'i' are different. Now can you spot the difference?

I see the difference in upper and lower case. But that does not say anything at all.

Exactly. It never was meant to say anything at all, to anyone else BUT Me. I am here to prove a point, not necessarily to explain things now. Unless of course that was asked for. I have been asking to be challenged and asking for clarifying questions on ANY THING at all, from the onset. There has only been person on here who has come close to discussing things openly with me, which they were not quite sure about, and funnily enough that is the same person who thinks it is better to remain open. The people with the strongest beliefs are the ones who so strongly wanted to tell me I was wrong. With no logical arguing nor evidence at all by the way.

How could any person seriously KNOW I am wrong when they have not even known what i have been talking about?

The ONLY way to KNOW what another person is talking about is through a two-way open and clarifying discussion. This maybe a much longer process but it is a much more peaceful one that actually leads to new discoveries and thus finding new knowledge. But after all the "time and energy" being wasted here so far, and we have not even begun yet I am sure a open-end clarifying discussion would have been finished already.

This whole thing has been an exercise to prove what I am wanting to express, i.e., beliefs, and to a lesser extent, stop people from learning.

There is nothing to suggest that 'I' and I are different.

The one in quotation marks is to signify what that one is in relation to with the following words after it in italics, if I use them, otherwise it is used to make sure that the words coming from this 'I' is not necessarily a human point of view.

If you instead of making assumptions and believing things you asked for clarification then you would know what 'I' am doing here now.

No. I don't.

I know you do not know what I am doing here.

I NEVER said, "you do know". I said, "you would know". Meaning I already knew 'you do not know'. The 'would' means 'do not' obviously in relation to my sentence.

Because I told you to come up with different words for 'I',I, 'i' and i. Till now, from what I saw, you only used 'I' and I. Now there is 'i' to confuse the issue further. Just make words for them. Please.

When did you tell me to come up with different words for.....?

Point us all to the place please.

By the way I have been using 'i' from the onset.

You BELIEVE so without any proof. You take that to be a truth on which you base all your theory, isn't it?

Was it or was is it not 'you' who said that I do not know the basics about theories and/or hypothesis's, and that a hypothesis can not be challenged?

Yet this is exactly what you are continually trying to do here. Make assumptions about what you think I am writing about, and believe so strongly in those assumptions so you can not stop yourself of wanting to prove what you have no idea what i am going to write about wrong. A complete waste of time and energy on your part, 'I' must say.

I have said and you have even said wait till 'My' story/theory is finished so that you can then see the proof.

Well, what you accuse me of, I accuse you of. You have converted your hypothesis to a conclusion, making it a belief. I can show you if you come up with different words for the various kinds of I that you use. Do that, and we will discuss this again.

NO, you do not get out of this that easily.

You say I have converted My hypothesis to a conclusion, making it a belief. Provide just one piece of evidence of me doing this. You say I HAVE DONE IT, so it would not be hard of you at all to prove that.

Do not try and turn this around from the very fact that if a person is more open, then they are able to learn more, of some and any thing else.

If you are open enough then you will see that i have just provided you with what I just asked you to provide. Let us see if you are able to find it. An truly open person could and would have noticed, and thus 'seen', understood, this already.

Right now, if I say I you say you meant 'I' and if I say 'I' you say you meant I. I have no idea what which means when. So make a word for each and stick by it. The we will start a new discussion.

But you will not start a "new" discussion because just like in the "old" discussion there will be things that you will NOT even entertain the idea that could exist, therefore there really is nothing for you to talk about, from your beliefs.

The definitions are the exact same as previously explained and that is:

'I', am, God.

'God', is Thee living Being in ALL things. The 'Mind', is God in the invisible non-physical sense whilst 'All physical things', is God in the obviously visibly seen physical sense.

'i' am ken.

'ken' is the individual being inside an individual body. This 'being', is made up of exactly the same two things as every other being inside all obviously seen physical human bodies is made up of, i.e., invisible non-physical thoughts and feelings.

And till you give the proof, we have to assume that it is your belief.

Till I give proof of WHAT exactly?

And, answer My questions from now on. You are not showing or proving anything at all to others if you do not clarify what is it that you are trying to say.

Do not "run" away this time. Just answer this question, this time.

Why would you assume that 'it', whatever 'it' is, is a belief.

I think we need we firstly need to sort the issue out of:

sthi: believes every person needs to believe. Whilst,

ken: thinks it is better if every person remains open.

If you are going to keep using words like "We have to assume that it is your belief", which are the VERY things that I think people do NOT have to do because I and new born human babies do NOT do that at all, and which I have to keep continually remind you that I do not now have beliefs, then we are not going to get anywhere here.

Either prove that I and new born babies have beliefs and can not survive without those beliefs or just accept what I say in regards to what I have and have not and do or do not do. If you can not get over this fact, then you are unable to discuss anything here. Thus verifying my arguments, theory, hypothesis, AND what 'I think' is completely right once and for ALL, humanity.

[ken]

[

Those beliefs keep 'you' as a 'thinker', never really 'knowing', for sure. What 'you' believe actually blocks you and keeps you from un-covering and dis-covering this and ALL Truth.

Soooo, stripped of every belief, and thought..therein lies the truth hidden in plain sight ..right?


So the truth can be known but not by i

YES EXACTLY..

Which fits in perfectly with, if you stop mental chatter, which is continually coming from the 'i', in its assumptions, beliefs, preconceived ideas, prejudices, preconception, etc., etc., etc., and just stop and LISTEN, then 'you' will hear and see not just the KNOWN but also from the KNOWN.

And this can all be backed up, even scientifically, if necessary.

And there is a "million" other things also that fit-in-with what you have been "trying" to say.

[ken]

My question was: "By the way you did not answer my question. Can you spot and what was the difference?' Was in relation to:

'I' am the Mind.

'i' am thoughts (and feelings).


Can you at least try to answer my question and what it is in relation to NOW. Can you spot and what is the difference between:

'I' am the Mind. And,

'i' am thoughts (and feelings).

The only difference I can think of is that...

i am thoughts and feelings is a belief

I am the mind is not a belief

I just wanted you to spot the big 'I' from the little 'i' for now and tell me that you could see that difference.

A 'person self' IS thoughts (and feelings, we can disregard feelings for now) so when a thinker is just viewing or thinking things then that is fair enough, that is what people are supposed to do, but when a thinker is believing instead of just thinking, then they are blocking themselves from further discoveries. For example if a believer believes another person does something, but the person says they did not, then with no amount of evidence the believer with believe them. A thinker (or viewer) on the other hand will just wait for the evidence and/or depending on how much trust they have in the person, then they will decide.

A 'God Self' KNOWS. This IS the Mind, The open Mind NEVER has to have a belief. IT KNOWS.

Our discussions in these writings in this forum will prove and is all that will be needed for future generations to fully understand 'My' (so called) "Theory".

You can't turn what is not a theory into a theory. That's not how real truth is found.

Whatever I have and am doing happens in whatever way it is happening. I do not change what is not a theory into a theory and vice versa. I am just learning how to re-arrange words in a way that can be best understood by ALL people. This it could be said IS a continual process, which will be better understood later on.

[Dontaskme]

My question was: "By the way you did not answer my question. Can you spot and what was the difference?' Was in relation to:

'I' am the Mind.

'i' am thoughts (and feelings).


Can you at least try to answer my question and what it is in relation to NOW. Can you spot and what is the difference between:

'I' am the Mind. And,

'i' am thoughts (and feelings).

The only difference I can think of is that...

i am thoughts and feelings is a belief

I am the mind is not a belief

I just wanted you to spot the big 'I' from the little 'i' for now and tell me that you could see that difference.

A 'person self' IS thoughts (and feelings, we can disregard feelings for now) so when a thinker is just viewing or thinking things then that is fair enough, that is what people are supposed to do, but when a thinker is believing instead of just thinking, then they are blocking themselves from further discoveries. For example if a believer believes another person does something, but the person says they did not, then with no amount of evidence the believer with believe them. A thinker (or viewer) on the other hand will just wait for the evidence and/or depending on how much trust they have in the person, then they will decide.

A 'God Self' KNOWS. This IS the Mind, The open Mind NEVER has to have a belief. IT KNOWS.

I totally get this ken.

I know exactly what you are saying. And thanks for explaining it the way you see it to me. I agree.