Lacewing wrote: ↑Tue Jan 29, 2019 8:47 am
Age...I think you're taking all of this a bit too extreme and out of context.
I said this to Nick "If you want to truly consider human nature interfering with spiritual nature, you have to stop the human noise." This was applicable based on things he has said about human nature interfering with spiritual nature. I wanted to point out the element of human noise to him (which he has a lot of).
I said this in response to you "It seems to make sense that it's hard to have clarity when one is filled with noise". It is a general statement... not some sort of absolute.
Yes I know all this.
You have more or less just repeated what I wrote.
I just asked you if that was the only way. Your reply implied that you were unsure that there could be any other way, which would have been the end of this. But then you asked me what I think. So, I responded.
If you think what I have said is "a bit to extreme and out of context", then maybe it best not to ask for what I think.
Lacewing wrote: ↑Tue Jan 29, 2019 8:47 amHere you wrote your interpretations of me...
Age wrote: ↑Tue Jan 29, 2019 5:10 am1. You have to stop human noise if you want to truly consider human nature interfering with spiritual nature. Whereas, I do not have to do any such thing.
Well, no... there are many degrees and variables (to everything) from my perspective.
To you, are there other ways of truly considering human nature interfering with spiritual nature other than just stopping human noise?
Lacewing wrote: ↑Tue Jan 29, 2019 8:47 am You are mistaken if you think you know some sort of absolute in regard to what I am referring to as "spiritual nature"... or some certain way it must be experienced.
I am not thinking at all, so that is completely inaccurate, and, there was absolutely no need to say this here.
Lacewing wrote: ↑Tue Jan 29, 2019 8:47 am I don't think that way.
Yes I know. That is what I am pointing out, when I asked you if that certain way, which you proposed, was the only way. I was just clarifying if, to you, that there could be other ways.
Then, because you asked what I think, to your reply, I just replied by saying there are other ways.
Lacewing wrote: ↑Tue Jan 29, 2019 8:47 amAge wrote: ↑Tue Jan 29, 2019 5:10 am2. To you it seems to make sense that it is hard to have clarity when one is filled with noise. Whereas, I KNOW just how truly simple and easy it really is to gain and have clarity, even with ALL of the human noise going on.
You remind me of dontaskme, in that she always wanted to have "the best/highest answer".
If that is what I remind you, then that is fine. I can not refute that. But I can tell you that by just expressing what I have or do is NOT having "the best/highest answer", at all. I was just pointing out that there are other ways from the one that you were proposing.
I am just expressing what is. There are NO "better or higher answers" to what one has or does. Unless of course you think that what you, or others, have or do is better and/or higher than what others have or do.
Lacewing wrote: ↑Tue Jan 29, 2019 8:47 amIt CAN OFTEN be hard to have clarity when one is filled with noise. It is also possible to have clarity despite the noise. You seem intent on disputing some rigid interpretation of my words in order to classify me compared to you. There's really not that much disagreement here.
I am not sure why you are seeing I have some rigid "interpretation" of your words, when all I did at the start was just ask for clarification, of your words. Usually just by the process of asking for clarification, of one's words, shows inquisitiveness, and not a rigidness. You clarified that you seem to not know of any other way than the one that you proposed. So, if an 'rigidness' appeared, then was that because of your response to my clarifying question?
Lacewing wrote: ↑Tue Jan 29, 2019 8:47 amAge wrote: ↑Tue Jan 29, 2019 5:10 am
That all depends on over what length of period are you talking about?
Really?
Yes
Lacewing wrote: ↑Tue Jan 29, 2019 8:47 amHow about over the span of just a few moments?
Then one can very easily and very surely have complete spiritual clarity.
Lacewing wrote: ↑Tue Jan 29, 2019 8:47 am Or a lifetime. Does it matter?
Yes.
Lacewing wrote: ↑Tue Jan 29, 2019 8:47 amBelow you acknowledge how much it varies...
Yes I know. The purpose for writing the below was to show how much variance there actually is.
Lacewing wrote: ↑Tue Jan 29, 2019 8:47 amAge wrote: ↑Tue Jan 29, 2019 5:10 amSome people, at times, have complete spiritual clarity while at other times they are completely filled with noise. Some people are filled with noise more than others are and some have more spiritual clarity than others have. Some other people may be able to reach complete spiritual clarity for very short periods but are most of the time filled with or partly filled with noise, while other people may never have had complete spiritual clarity but are far less filled with noise compared to the other person. There are just to many people with countless many variables and varying degrees of differences of complete clarity to complete noise in every thing else in between to actually discuss this to its full extend.
But there is, at the moment, no person that I can see who has always complete spiritual clarity nor completely filled with noise.
You said earlier "Whereas, I KNOW just how truly simple and easy it really is to gain and have clarity, even with ALL of the human noise going on."
Here you write your interpretation of me... (I just wrote this because when this happens you like to make it known).
Lacewing wrote: ↑Tue Jan 29, 2019 8:47 amSo why don't you do it all of the time? (Or do you not include yourself in the bolded statement above?)
You would have to first know the difference between the word 'I' and the word 'you', from a completely objective perspective, to be able to understand the correct response to this question.