The tree of knowledge

Is there a God? If so, what is She like?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Dontaskme »

Immanuel Can wrote: Wed Mar 10, 2021 4:33 pm As I say, I would totally get this objection if you believed there were "sentient creatures" who actually "suffered." But you say that there is only your own consciousness, which is dreaming.

Consequently, I can't see what your objection is: tell your consciousness not to "dream" that, I guess. :?
As I've said to you before, the dreamer, dream and dreaming are one. The light/ or consciousness or awareness that knows a nightly dream is the same knowing that knows the waking dream.

The absurd notion of all is ONE, and the many are the one, makes no coherent sense to you IC ..but it makes sense to me...perfect sense actually.

You see, in knowledge, in knowing you are aware you are a sentient organism, you the dreamer have to be lucid within your own dream to know you are dreaming. That's what is meant by the capacity to know something, you know pain is bad, and pleasure is good..when the dreamer becomes aware of itself in it's own dreaming, the dreamer enters the realm of knowledge, the dreamer becomes aware of itself as a character with feeling, and emotions and intelligence.

Life in general, prior to any concept imposed upon it, is a non-conceptual phenomena. Life is not the carrier of a concept. A concept is the carrier of life within the known dream that appears as a live sentient human character with a life.

The concept that I exist as a character, exists only within the dream as a belief where dreamer is aware it is dreaming. So going back to the dreamer, who becomes conscious of it's own consciousness, it is that one who knows the difference between pain and pleasure and can decide whether pain is worth the experience, an experience that is real only insofar as the dreamer is real.

So in fact, collectively, we are dreaming ourselves alive, and if we can do that, then we can stop doing it any time we want. But if the need for this dreamt character is there, then that need will be difficult to ignore. And so the pain and suffering will continue, and it's consciousness alone that is choosing to need it.

Now, prior to knowledge, or concept. Life has no need, it just is, it's not needing to be, it's just being. Nothing really needs to be, so any need is just an artificially imposed concept, it's a pseudo construct. In other words, humans do not need a God to be, no more than a bee needs a God to be. A bee is just pure being. A bee needs a flower to gather pollen to make honey, but all this is just functioning without a concept informing it to do so, it's just a natural phenomena. The bees are not setting up churches inside their hives praying for a good pollen season.

Anyways, you probably think this is all incoherent too, no matter.

.

.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22140
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Immanuel Can »

Dontaskme wrote: Wed Mar 10, 2021 5:46 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Wed Mar 10, 2021 4:33 pm As I say, I would totally get this objection if you believed there were "sentient creatures" who actually "suffered." But you say that there is only your own consciousness, which is dreaming.

Consequently, I can't see what your objection is: tell your consciousness not to "dream" that, I guess. :?
As I've said to you before, the dreamer, dream and dreaming are one.
That makes all the things you indict in the world your fault. You are the dreamer; if you don't like what you dream, dream better. :shock: Nobody's at fault by you, if you don't; because as you say, there's nothing beyond that.

What more can be said?

But I don't believe that, and I think you don't either. You just don't realize how much you don't believe it; because you still think there's a "world" out there, and you indict God with having responsibility for the "pain and suffering" in it. But if you're right, there IS none.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Dontaskme »

Immanuel Can wrote: Wed Mar 10, 2021 6:40 pm
Dontaskme wrote: Wed Mar 10, 2021 5:46 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Wed Mar 10, 2021 4:33 pm As I say, I would totally get this objection if you believed there were "sentient creatures" who actually "suffered." But you say that there is only your own consciousness, which is dreaming.

Consequently, I can't see what your objection is: tell your consciousness not to "dream" that, I guess. :?
As I've said to you before, the dreamer, dream and dreaming are one.
That makes all the things you indict in the world your fault. You are the dreamer; if you don't like what you dream, dream better. :shock: Nobody's at fault by you, if you don't; because as you say, there's nothing beyond that.

What more can be said?

But I don't believe that, and I think you don't either. You just don't realize how much you don't believe it; because you still think there's a "world" out there, and you indict God with having responsibility for the "pain and suffering" in it. But if you're right, there IS none.
You are still muddling and fumbling with this nondual message.

The only one at fault is the one who believes it exists. The belief that one exists, is the one who is totally responsible for the actions of that one.

If it is my pain, then only I the one who owns the pain can stop the pain, and they way I stop the pain is to stop making more sentient creatures to also suffer the pain I know to exist.

If the belief that I exist is real and true, then only I am responsible for cleaning up the mess I make here. If there was no mess made then there would be no need to clean it up.

The one that claims to know it exists, will be of knowledge, and in knowledge that one will know every concept as and when it arise, for that one will be the only knowing there is. So yeah, everything will be all the knowers fault.

The believed knower will already know that to make another sentient creature will impose all the experiences of what it means to be alive upon that other creature, that they made, even though that other sentient creature had no power to consent to what it is about to endure because of someone elses desire.

.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Dontaskme »

If you insist on there being a God.

Then there is ONLY GOD

GOD has to be everything.

There's nothing that is not God.

It's only God separating from himself and then wanting to come together again.

It's only God not believing in himself or believing in himself.

It's only God that pretends to not love himself knowing there is only himself to love anyway.

It's only God pretending to not love himself and feeling like he is throwing himself under the bus. ( lake of fire)

.


The one who is making all this story up is the only one who exists.

I really do not know why it is so difficult to understand the following pointer :arrow:

There is no Self because there is no other than Self

Even a child would understand that.

Believing or not believing in Self will make no difference to the actuality of SELF - any belief for or against will not deface it. For IT IS without doubt or error, and it does not belong to any belief structure.

Every object known is known only to Self, the only knowing there is, so the known has to be none other than the Relative Absolute.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22140
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Immanuel Can »

Dontaskme wrote: Wed Mar 10, 2021 7:43 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Wed Mar 10, 2021 6:40 pm
Dontaskme wrote: Wed Mar 10, 2021 5:46 pm
As I've said to you before, the dreamer, dream and dreaming are one.
That makes all the things you indict in the world your fault. You are the dreamer; if you don't like what you dream, dream better. :shock: Nobody's at fault by you, if you don't; because as you say, there's nothing beyond that.

What more can be said?

But I don't believe that, and I think you don't either. You just don't realize how much you don't believe it; because you still think there's a "world" out there, and you indict God with having responsibility for the "pain and suffering" in it. But if you're right, there IS none.
You are still muddling and fumbling with this nondual message.
Not at all. I'm perfectly clear.

If we are living in your "dream," then you are at fault for everything that happens here. There's nobody else that could be, according to you.

So why are you being so "evil" as to dream about other "creatures" having all kinds of "pain and suffering"? Why aren't you nicer, and make the dream nicer? :shock:
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Dontaskme »

Immanuel Can wrote: Wed Mar 10, 2021 8:31 pm
Dontaskme wrote: Wed Mar 10, 2021 7:43 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Wed Mar 10, 2021 6:40 pm
That makes all the things you indict in the world your fault. You are the dreamer; if you don't like what you dream, dream better. :shock: Nobody's at fault by you, if you don't; because as you say, there's nothing beyond that.

What more can be said?

But I don't believe that, and I think you don't either. You just don't realize how much you don't believe it; because you still think there's a "world" out there, and you indict God with having responsibility for the "pain and suffering" in it. But if you're right, there IS none.
You are still muddling and fumbling with this nondual message.
Not at all. I'm perfectly clear.

If we are living in your "dream," then you are at fault for everything that happens here. There's nobody else that could be, according to you.

So why are you being so "evil" as to dream about other "creatures" having all kinds of "pain and suffering"? Why aren't you nicer, and make the dream nicer? :shock:

Fine, just live in your fantasy pink icecream and candy floss world of niceness, and you'll be saved from all the evil people. .won't be long now before you are to live in heaven forever with God. Have fun chasing rainbows.
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Dontaskme »

Immanuel Can wrote: Wed Mar 10, 2021 8:31 pm
So why are you being so "evil" as to dream about other "creatures" having all kinds of "pain and suffering"? Why aren't you nicer, and make the dream nicer? :shock:
Knowledge is only within the illusory dream of separation, the knowledge that I exist, and the knowledge that I experience sensation, both pleasure and pain.

In knowledge I know that pain and suffering is a really fucked up bad experience, In knowing, I am compassionate for the creature who has to endure any type of evil or pain. If I can experience pain then I know others can too. To me, to have to live a life of pain is just not good enough, no one, not one single sentient creature should ever have to live a painful existence. And yet that's all you see in nature, pain and suffering, and pleasure only exists when there is a temporal absence of pain. In reality, there is only the whip, and not the whip. This is not difficult to understand. Just how long are we supposed to stand this crap.

In my compassion, I see no point in what is a pointless consuming reproducing farce that is imposed selfishly upon every unborn creature whether they are human or animal to have to endure the same fate that we know through experience to be really really crappy.

If you choose to not believe that Nature is a terrible and horrible thing, and that whoever made nature fucked up, then fine, you can always run into the loving arms of your big sky daddy for comfort, everytime you are in fear of facing the actual fact, that is this cold harsh brutal reality that is raw nature.

.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22140
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Immanuel Can »

Dontaskme wrote: Thu Mar 11, 2021 8:48 am
Immanuel Can wrote: Wed Mar 10, 2021 8:31 pm So why are you being so "evil" as to dream about other "creatures" having all kinds of "pain and suffering"? Why aren't you nicer, and make the dream nicer? :shock:
Fine, just live in your fantasy pink icecream and candy floss world of niceness,
Heh. :D
It has nothing to do with me, apparently -- you're "the dreamer," so you're responsible for all the evil. Who else could be?
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22140
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Immanuel Can »

Dontaskme wrote: Thu Mar 11, 2021 12:28 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Wed Mar 10, 2021 8:31 pm
So why are you being so "evil" as to dream about other "creatures" having all kinds of "pain and suffering"? Why aren't you nicer, and make the dream nicer? :shock:
Knowledge is only within the illusory dream of separation, the knowledge that I exist, and the knowledge that I experience sensation, both pleasure and pain.
But since you are the only thing in the universe, "the dreamer," you say, all the "sensations, pleasure and pain" are your own fault. There's nobody else whose fault they could be, right?
I am compassionate for the creature who has to endure any type of evil or pain.
You mean, "I feel sorry for myself?" Because there's nobody else for you to feel sorry for, you say. But why? Why are you self-pitying? According to you, you're the cause of your own misery. :shock:

Why don't you just stop it? :?
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Dontaskme »

Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Mar 11, 2021 2:49 pm
Dontaskme wrote: Thu Mar 11, 2021 12:28 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Wed Mar 10, 2021 8:31 pm
So why are you being so "evil" as to dream about other "creatures" having all kinds of "pain and suffering"? Why aren't you nicer, and make the dream nicer? :shock:
Knowledge is only within the illusory dream of separation, the knowledge that I exist, and the knowledge that I experience sensation, both pleasure and pain.
But since you are the only thing in the universe, "the dreamer," you say, all the "sensations, pleasure and pain" are your own fault. There's nobody else whose fault they could be, right?
I am compassionate for the creature who has to endure any type of evil or pain.
You mean, "I feel sorry for myself?" Because there's nobody else for you to feel sorry for, you say. But why? Why are you self-pitying? According to you, you're the cause of your own misery. :shock:

Why don't you just stop it? :?
That's right, who ever started all this, who ever subjected sentient creatures to millions and millions of years of torture, pain, suffering, and misery is not worthy of worship, anyone with half a brain cell will know we've truly been gamed.

Game over for me. You are welcome to this unintelligent barbaric sick life. Just keep chasing your chocolate coated poisoned lollypops if that helps you get through the day, the trickery obviously worked to placate and give you a boner, as to make it all so ...Oooh I'm so worth it. Urgh!



.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22140
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Immanuel Can »

Dontaskme wrote: Thu Mar 11, 2021 5:51 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Mar 11, 2021 2:49 pm Why don't you just stop it? :?
That's right, who ever started all this,
You know who it was, you say...it was you. :shock:
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Dontaskme »

Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Mar 11, 2021 6:26 pm
Dontaskme wrote: Thu Mar 11, 2021 5:51 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Thu Mar 11, 2021 2:49 pm Why don't you just stop it? :?
That's right, who ever started all this,
You know who it was, you say...it was you. :shock:

This 'you' here that 'you' there speaks of is merely one of the multitudinous sentient lenses through which ''all that is'' perceives its self.
The 'you' there is a 'me' and the 'me' here is a 'you' too. 8) :wink:

Within some unknowable dynamic, ''all that is'' seems to enjoy the act of identifying itself as one of the lenses.

This identification creates a self referential loop, an apparent secondary reality, out of which a phantom emerges, pulled by invisible strings.

Image
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22140
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Immanuel Can »

Dontaskme wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 8:48 am This 'you' here that 'you' there speaks of is merely one of the multitudinous sentient lenses through which ''all that is'' perceives its self.
The 'you' there is a 'me' and the 'me' here is a 'you' too. 8) :wink:

Within some unknowable dynamic, ''all that is'' seems to enjoy the act of identifying itself as one of the lenses.

This identification creates a self referential loop, an apparent secondary reality, out of which a phantom emerges, pulled by invisible strings.
Utterly incomprehensible. I can't follow you at all here. There at things "being done" by no particular agency at all, "you"s and "me"s you've already said you don't believe in, and "lenses" held by invisible hands. No wonder you call it "unknowable."
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Dontaskme »

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 3:00 pm
Dontaskme wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 8:48 am This 'you' here that 'you' there speaks of is merely one of the multitudinous sentient lenses through which ''all that is'' perceives its self.
The 'you' there is a 'me' and the 'me' here is a 'you' too. 8) :wink:

Within some unknowable dynamic, ''all that is'' seems to enjoy the act of identifying itself as one of the lenses.

This identification creates a self referential loop, an apparent secondary reality, out of which a phantom emerges, pulled by invisible strings.
Utterly incomprehensible.
That's what I thought when I was reading the Book of Genesis. Had a quick peep at Revelations too, :shock: :? only to be encountered with the same problem. :wink:

Immanuel Can wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 3:00 pm There at things "being done" by no particular agency at all, "you"s and "me"s you've already said you don't believe in, and "lenses" held by invisible hands. No wonder you call it "unknowable."
For me, after many years of study into the nature of being alive. I discovered there was absolutely nothing to believe. I saw that everything was nothing, or that nothing was everything, same thing. Including all my personal beliefs, and all the personal thoughts, that I thought were mine, including all the knowledege that I thought I knew.

That's why I choose to talk only about what actually matters, and that to me is what is known as the unknowable mystery of life, and sentient being.

For me, there is nothing else to talk about. I'm bored with superficial chit-chats made up of theory, speculation, and mostly born of pretensious assumptions and beliefs. I personally prefer to get to the genuine crux of WHO is the actual knower of anything known.

Talking about the crux of the nature of being is all that interests me.

Of course, I'm interested in the concept of a ''God Supreme Creator Being'' that is believed to be the sole orchestrater of both sentient and non-sentient life. I'm curious even though I do not believe there is anything to believe in. So I guess what I am trying to say is ..I personally cannot make any comprehendable sense of the idea there is a 'God Supreme Creator Being'' that is believed to be the sole orchestrater of both sentient and non-sentient life. Nor can I make sense of God's word ( The Bible)

So you do have my sympathy when it comes to incomprehensibles IC. :wink:

Our mission if we both choose to accept it - is to be able to convince each other sincerely and honestly, that we both know exactly what we are talking about, when it comes to the actual physical nature of reality - in other words, what it means, and why is it so, that life is happening at all - and can it be knowable and comprehensible, and by whom exactly.

I personally, do not think it is knowable and comprehensible. Now if you do, then it's your job to convince me otherwise. :wink:

Anyhow, I appreciate you sticking by me IC... I enjoy our talks, I know I come accross as a negative thinker, but to me life is mostly a negative. I'm in no way under and delusion about that, but I am a good person, I have to be because it's the only way to be at peace among the chaos within the jungle of life. I've always been able to love and look after me, when the going gets rough. I usually come through relatively unscathed, but only because I use intelligence that seems to permeate my being, I am deeply aware, so to speak. But at the same time I do not really know who or what is being aware. Who is knowing, who is the knower. As far as I have figured out I cannot KNOW anything, except as a belief, so I figured all beliefs, must come from not-knowing.


.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22140
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: The tree of knowledge

Post by Immanuel Can »

Dontaskme wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 8:24 am For me, after many years of study into the nature of being alive. I discovered there was absolutely nothing to believe. I saw that everything was nothing, or that nothing was everything, same thing. Including all my personal beliefs, and all the personal thoughts, that I thought were mine, including all the knowledege that I thought I knew.
By this description, you're a Nihilist, by definition. But I don't think that's quite right, so I have to suppose you're being hyperbolical here.
Anyhow, I appreciate you sticking by me IC... I enjoy our talks, I know I come accross as a negative thinker, but to me life is mostly a negative.
Yeah, that would sound like Nihilism. But again, i don't think you're actually as totally negative as all that.
I am deeply aware, so to speak. But at the same time I do not really know who or what is being aware. Who is knowing, who is the knower. As far as I have figured out I cannot KNOW anything, except as a belief, so I figured all beliefs, must come from not-knowing.
So in the end, it's a visceral belief? It's a kind of "this is how it seems to me subjectively, so I'm assuming it's true" kind of thing?

But there's this, D. : Why would we think "I don't know..." translates into "There is nothing to know..."? Were that so, there would be no such thing as learning, because learning always takes us from what we don't know (yet) to what we do know. And I assume you're not saying you don't believe you can learn anything...
Post Reply