Proof that all is ONENESS

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 1273
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Proof that all is ONENESS

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:00 am

daramantus wrote:
Sat Dec 09, 2017 11:56 pm
Greta wrote:
Fri Oct 07, 2016 11:58 pm
Dontaskme wrote:
You might not believe me, but since awakening to oneness, I have absolutely no fear of death whatsoever. I know it's easier to say that but I really do not care about dying, because I know it's not real. I also know that any sane person is not going to believe that, but other peoples belief is not my concern. I already know my truth.

You only remember the memory of what you think you are.
Actually I remember that happened in my past (obviously!) along with family, friends, home, environment, music and art - the list does on.
Dontaskme wrote:Only the memory of you is having a life. A memory is not you, you are that which is aware of memory ..which is emptiness awareness. While you slept, the memory of you was temporally offline. But your real self (awareness) wasn't asleep, awareness does not sleep or wake up, it's always self shining and present right now.
Nope, my consciousness goes dormant. Quiet and minimal, reduced to unconscious reflex actions. Note that the "hard line" between unconscious and conscious mind is deceiving because consciousness is a variable continuum.

The "hard line" we perceive between the conscious and unconscious is due to the instability of inbetween states, so we tend to quickly fall between one or the other - either falling into sleep or full wakefulness, and that is how we spend most of our days and nights.

Stable and persistent inbetween states - mindless waking states - can be achieved either via flow (Zen) states or meditation. Waking flow states would seem to be the very opposite to sleep and dormancy - the ultimate in 'aliveness" - but, in truth, those desirable states are less conscious than thinking states. The very basis of those states is the relinquishing of conscious control, fearlessly trusting the body to operate in an automatic (and hopefully well trained) manner. I say "fearlessly" because it takes some courage to fully let go of conscious control; it's often a significant social risk.
Dontaskme wrote:If some one calls your name while you are in deep sleep, who do you think is awakening from that sleep? all that happens is the memory of you comes back online, the memory of you doesn't wake you up, the awareness of the memory of you wakes you up...so because what you really are is awareness .. you were able to hear your name called while the memory of you was offline...because awareness is always present, with or without you which is only ever memory... so the awareness of your name being called is what triggered the memory of you to come back online. Your consciousness is recording your life as it goes along, and then awareness is witnessing that recording. This life is all a dream. What you think is your life, is the dreamer awareness having a dream. When the dream is over,(physical death) awareness has another dream (physical life)..and just as no dream is ever remembered, awareness doesn't remember it's dreams, and is why each new dream (physical life) is totally unique and brand new...
I'm trying to put my finger on the logical error you are making. I think it's an overly strong self focus, which is ironic since that's what you are saying doesn't exist. Many try to pin down the self as either a spirit or an illusion. Those who claim the self doesn't exist tend to fall into two camps - pantheists like yourself or fundamentalist rationalists who claim consciousness (and the self) doesn't exist, only experiences.

It's all too black-and-white. The individual self is something that varies like a flame from moment to moment. At times it's smouldering, at other times a roaring blaze, but constantly changing. You may then wonder why I would say the self is real rather than the unstable phantasm I described? Practicality. As noted earlier, one of us can be happy while the other is in agony. That is, we might all be one, but our bodies impose separate realities.

Funny thing is that I argue a similar thing to you in terms of biology and also get criticised. Rather than the universe or the whole of reality, I think about the "oneness" of the biosphere, actually the entire planet. It can be thought of as one cohesive entity with a natural path that is similar in nature to that of its living inhabitants - to persist, grow and develop. Given humanity's space programs, it appears that the biosphere is on the way to spreading out elsewhere.

Still, why should I only consider oneness at the planetary scale? The solar system too can be thought of as one thing. Why stop there? There's galaxies, galactic clusters and superclusters. We can pan out until we arrive at your much-touted "oneness".

So there we are. All is one. One big thing - a universe, multiverse, or maybe something else. So, sure, I agree. However, in practical terms, we are separate. Each organism's mental processes are largely opaque to those of others. Each organism's pain and pleasure is restricted to itself and, in the case of intelligent mammals, only felt in part by others via empathy.
Dontaskme wrote:... oneness is far from boring...since every dream is unique, and is appearing just how it is designed to be, that being different every time around...there is a boundless eternity of experiences to be had in life.
A contradiction. If "every dream is unique" then they must be separate. In true oneness there is no uniqueness, only one uniform, entirely smooth thing. Each and every ripple or variation is a separation, a breaking up of the unity. And that, according to the boffins, is the story of our universe. At one point there was almost no separation at all. Now we are all spread out through space and time. We are still theoretically all one thing, but the bits are a long way from each other and, more importantly, largely don't give a damn about each other (or anything).

So there is a sense of, yes, all is oneness, but so what?
Dontaskme wrote:I don't know if you are able to grasp what I am saying, but it doesn't matter, it's what the sages call enlightenment, it is the death of the ego self and the subsequent awakening to oneness, but I cannot make you see or experience this by my words alone. It's experiential to the one who awakens.
I didn't get this for years and years of trying to understand it myself personally, it took me so long to figure this out with my mind, until one day it all clicked into place. It' not very easy to put into words though. But I'm getting better, I'm better at it than I used to be.
Contradictory. Since we are all one, if you are enlightened then so am I, and so is everyone and everything. However, we are different and, according to some arcane and unsubstantiated scale of human merit, we have attained different levels of "enlightenment".

You have to acknowledge separation, even if you don't like it. Personally, I like being separate.
is not one or two
oneness is a myth
All number, as dimensions, are strictly the result of one reflecting itself ad-infinitum as one. All numbers are merely structural extensions of 1 as 1.

daramantus
Posts: 124
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 2:44 pm

Re: Proof that all is ONENESS

Post by daramantus » Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:01 am

Dontaskme wrote:
Sun Oct 09, 2016 1:35 pm
Scott Mayers wrote: A 'dilemma' is basically the meaning of some supportive truth (a 'lemma') to be 'two-faced', which is just another way of saying something appears 'contradictory'. However, if we simply ACCEPT that 'contradiction' IS the cause or 'force' of reality itself, then it is alright for nature to BE contradictory. BUT it requires that reality derives FROM absolute nothing itself. This is because 'when' (a kind of trap since absolute nothing doesn't even mean 'time' exists there) absolute Nothing is "true", since this also means that 'truth' itself is without substance, the lawless nature of nothing has only to either remain BEING nothing, which 'contradicts' being 'consistent' (meaning to "stay the same as it is"), when it is "inconsistent". As such reality is caused by the nature of just what you interpret as ONENESS to be 'true' (because it is CONSISTENT), yet that if even 'a' nothing could exist, this cannot 'follow' from an ORIGIN of Absolute Oneness.

So you are correct to interpret reality as requiring being ONE but nature derives this as being 'true' only when oneness, nothingness, and infinity, all simultaneously exist. But only NOTHINGNESS is 'consistent' in that it justifies the causation of each of these independently. So reality is JUST the very struggle of trying to BE 'absolutely true' when it can't be at the same time. This perpetual contradiction IS the nature of Totality (that ONENESS that defines us all inclusively).
Thanks Scott. I totally agree with everything you are saying. And is why I say only NOT KNOWING is original.

The original face of presence cannot be seen, only that what presence is looking at can be seen. And within this dynamic of presence, that which is seen is the only face available - when that is seen, there's an energy in the form of thought that thinks I Am that.
The thought I Am that.. is inseparable from what's looking, the thought I Am that arises, is sourced within the same presence. So looking is only looking at itself which cannot be seen by that which it's looking at because they are inseparably one... thus without this energetic inner thought arising within this unseen presence, that's inseparable from it, what is seen would have no reality. So no one(presence) gives birth to the other as and through (thought) which is itself..looking at itself. (''Thought'') being the mind/brain/ body organism.
So nothing is actually here but a mirage,albeit a persistent one.That's how I came to the conclusion that all is one.

So where there's light there'll be the mirage it reflects. And light is what this is, and light is not an experience. Because light is everything and everywhere infinitely.

Does that make sense to you Scott? if it does, then at least I won't have to think I'm the only crazy one. :wink:
Scott Mayers wrote:I thank you too, by the way, because you appropriately take the correct skepticism needed to determine the problem. But don't expect others to easily follow. I still struggle but can only count on others like yourself to independently think the same way to connect. If WE are the crazy ones, so be it. It's probably better that way. (It's like being the ultimate magicians whom people believe might be doing 'tricks' when to the magician, he/she is NOT deluded....they are not 'tricks' to him, that is, only to the audience's perspective are they apparently "tricks". :mrgreen: )
I know what you mean :wink: ..and I like the way you say it.
who told you that thought is energy? and what is your evidence of it?
and who told you that you yourself has an energy that transform 'me' into reality, what does that even mean?
prove that energy

daramantus
Posts: 124
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 2:44 pm

Re: Proof that all is ONENESS

Post by daramantus » Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:03 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:00 am
daramantus wrote:
Sat Dec 09, 2017 11:56 pm
Greta wrote:
Fri Oct 07, 2016 11:58 pm

Actually I remember that happened in my past (obviously!) along with family, friends, home, environment, music and art - the list does on.


Nope, my consciousness goes dormant. Quiet and minimal, reduced to unconscious reflex actions. Note that the "hard line" between unconscious and conscious mind is deceiving because consciousness is a variable continuum.

The "hard line" we perceive between the conscious and unconscious is due to the instability of inbetween states, so we tend to quickly fall between one or the other - either falling into sleep or full wakefulness, and that is how we spend most of our days and nights.

Stable and persistent inbetween states - mindless waking states - can be achieved either via flow (Zen) states or meditation. Waking flow states would seem to be the very opposite to sleep and dormancy - the ultimate in 'aliveness" - but, in truth, those desirable states are less conscious than thinking states. The very basis of those states is the relinquishing of conscious control, fearlessly trusting the body to operate in an automatic (and hopefully well trained) manner. I say "fearlessly" because it takes some courage to fully let go of conscious control; it's often a significant social risk.


I'm trying to put my finger on the logical error you are making. I think it's an overly strong self focus, which is ironic since that's what you are saying doesn't exist. Many try to pin down the self as either a spirit or an illusion. Those who claim the self doesn't exist tend to fall into two camps - pantheists like yourself or fundamentalist rationalists who claim consciousness (and the self) doesn't exist, only experiences.

It's all too black-and-white. The individual self is something that varies like a flame from moment to moment. At times it's smouldering, at other times a roaring blaze, but constantly changing. You may then wonder why I would say the self is real rather than the unstable phantasm I described? Practicality. As noted earlier, one of us can be happy while the other is in agony. That is, we might all be one, but our bodies impose separate realities.

Funny thing is that I argue a similar thing to you in terms of biology and also get criticised. Rather than the universe or the whole of reality, I think about the "oneness" of the biosphere, actually the entire planet. It can be thought of as one cohesive entity with a natural path that is similar in nature to that of its living inhabitants - to persist, grow and develop. Given humanity's space programs, it appears that the biosphere is on the way to spreading out elsewhere.

Still, why should I only consider oneness at the planetary scale? The solar system too can be thought of as one thing. Why stop there? There's galaxies, galactic clusters and superclusters. We can pan out until we arrive at your much-touted "oneness".

So there we are. All is one. One big thing - a universe, multiverse, or maybe something else. So, sure, I agree. However, in practical terms, we are separate. Each organism's mental processes are largely opaque to those of others. Each organism's pain and pleasure is restricted to itself and, in the case of intelligent mammals, only felt in part by others via empathy.


A contradiction. If "every dream is unique" then they must be separate. In true oneness there is no uniqueness, only one uniform, entirely smooth thing. Each and every ripple or variation is a separation, a breaking up of the unity. And that, according to the boffins, is the story of our universe. At one point there was almost no separation at all. Now we are all spread out through space and time. We are still theoretically all one thing, but the bits are a long way from each other and, more importantly, largely don't give a damn about each other (or anything).

So there is a sense of, yes, all is oneness, but so what?


Contradictory. Since we are all one, if you are enlightened then so am I, and so is everyone and everything. However, we are different and, according to some arcane and unsubstantiated scale of human merit, we have attained different levels of "enlightenment".

You have to acknowledge separation, even if you don't like it. Personally, I like being separate.
is not one or two
oneness is a myth
All number, as dimensions, are strictly the result of one reflecting itself ad-infinitum as one. All numbers are merely structural extensions of 1 as 1.
oneness is a myth , just like twoness, threness, it doesnt mean jack

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 1273
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Proof that all is ONENESS

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:10 am

daramantus wrote:
Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:03 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:00 am
daramantus wrote:
Sat Dec 09, 2017 11:56 pm


is not one or two
oneness is a myth
All number, as dimensions, are strictly the result of one reflecting itself ad-infinitum as one. All numbers are merely structural extensions of 1 as 1.
oneness is a myth , just like twoness, threness, it doesnt mean jack
Seriously.........? All myths are related in some degree of truth.......

daramantus
Posts: 124
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 2:44 pm

Re: Proof that all is ONENESS

Post by daramantus » Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:20 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:10 am
daramantus wrote:
Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:03 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:00 am


All number, as dimensions, are strictly the result of one reflecting itself ad-infinitum as one. All numbers are merely structural extensions of 1 as 1.
oneness is a myth , just like twoness, threness, it doesnt mean jack
Seriously.........? All myths are related in some degree of truth.......
l
Last edited by daramantus on Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:21 am, edited 1 time in total.

daramantus
Posts: 124
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 2:44 pm

Re: Proof that all is ONENESS

Post by daramantus » Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:21 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:10 am
daramantus wrote:
Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:03 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:00 am


All number, as dimensions, are strictly the result of one reflecting itself ad-infinitum as one. All numbers are merely structural extensions of 1 as 1.
oneness is a myth , just like twoness, threness, it doesnt mean jack
Seriously.........? All myths are related in some degree of truth.......
WHy don't you start a chat with the moron called "dontaskme" , and then listen to his "oneness" theory, and you will understand nothing about anything about no one and how nonsense is this

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 1273
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Proof that all is ONENESS

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:23 am

daramantus wrote:
Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:21 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:10 am
daramantus wrote:
Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:03 am


oneness is a myth , just like twoness, threness, it doesnt mean jack
Seriously.........? All myths are related in some degree of truth.......
WHy don't you start a chat with the moron called "dontaskme" , and then listen to his "oneness" theory, and you will understand nothing about anything about no one and how nonsense is this
Here is the math for it:

viewtopic.php?f=26&t=23228

Dontaskme
Posts: 3824
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: Proof that all is ONENESS

Post by Dontaskme » Sun Dec 10, 2017 9:41 pm

:shock: f
daramantus wrote:
Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:21 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:10 am
daramantus wrote:
Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:03 am


oneness is a myth , just like twoness, threness, it doesnt mean jack
Seriously.........? All myths are related in some degree of truth.......
WHy don't you start a chat with the moron called "dontaskme" , and then listen to his "oneness" theory, and you will understand nothing about anything about no one and how nonsense is this
Your attempt to understand nonduality is entertaining ....and you are not my worst nightmare since I stopped believing dreams were real a long time ago....your ga ga bla bla bla comments are all water off a ducks back mate.

You mention the word proof a lot...rather amusing considering the fact that the idea that anything needs to be proved could only arise where there is a sense of a separate self....something that is unique to humans only, since they are the ones that made up the so called entity in the first place using a bunch of letters from their own concocted alphabet.

Proof is evident in the being or the seeing. This already evident proof doesn’t need a second opinion for who or what other oneness would there be to stand as the prover of the proof that’s already evident...?

Now,...try to understand that for any proof to become known about anything at all ..requires a prover....stop and think before you ask for proof, first thing you need to do is prove there is a prover before you can start demanding proof ...when you can do that, then perhaps I’ll start to take you a little more seriously...

.

Have fun proving a prover....let me know what you find and report back to me with your ideas, and your written explanations of those ideas....this is probably going to get a whole lot more entertaining....bye for now.


.

daramantus
Posts: 124
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 2:44 pm

Re: Proof that all is ONENESS

Post by daramantus » Tue Dec 12, 2017 4:23 am

Dontaskme wrote:
Sun Dec 10, 2017 9:41 pm
:shock: f
daramantus wrote:
Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:21 am
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:10 am

Seriously.........? All myths are related in some degree of truth.......
WHy don't you start a chat with the moron called "dontaskme" , and then listen to his "oneness" theory, and you will understand nothing about anything about no one and how nonsense is this
Your attempt to understand nonduality is entertaining ....and you are not my worst nightmare since I stopped believing dreams were real a long time ago....your ga ga bla bla bla comments are all water off a ducks back mate.

You mention the word proof a lot...rather amusing considering the fact that the idea that anything needs to be proved could only arise where there is a sense of a separate self....something that is unique to humans only, since they are the ones that made up the so called entity in the first place using a bunch of letters from their own concocted alphabet.

Proof is evident in the being or the seeing. This already evident proof doesn’t need a second opinion for who or what other oneness would there be to stand as the prover of the proof that’s already evident...?

Now,...try to understand that for any proof to become known about anything at all ..requires a prover....stop and think before you ask for proof, first thing you need to do is prove there is a prover before you can start demanding proof ...when you can do that, then perhaps I’ll start to take you a little more seriously...

.

Have fun proving a prover....let me know what you find and report back to me with your ideas, and your written explanations of those ideas....this is probably going to get a whole lot more entertaining....bye for now.


.

Non duality is a fraud, there is nothing to understand but shitty fallacies, parroting stupid false claims and use some false analogies.

according with the confused puppies called, "Eodnhoj7" and "dontaskme" , reality should be like this image. dontaskme wouldnt be a person and there would be no one to answer and no one to talk about anything, in this image, the "observed" and "observer" are one and the same. , objects, without substance, just a big ball of nothing with no one there, and a wholeness, and a confusion of fullness and emptienss, with illusions, people's appearances, and aliens appearing out of nothing to no one, and each person would have the same consciousness, each one would observe it would be the same consciousness, but it wouldnt be separate from anyone, and the wholeness fullness planet that the empty creates out of the aliens simulatory system would be a simulation. real computers? someone to answer to, someone who borns, who is alive? nah, just the mysterious empty fullness big ball , only the utterly all one beings masturbating each for itself, you would be not observing anything and anyone, but another self being who would encounter itself....



makes total sense. this is the WORLDVIEW OF BOTH NONASKME AND THE OTHER IDIOT HERE. of course this world view doesn't exist , not even in cartoons
45465675757.png
45465675757.png (49.87 KiB) Viewed 569 times


only a big ball that doesn't know anything, steve jobs didnt create shit, it was the big ball out of it's power of nothing according to "dontaskme". who are the observers? according to dontaskme the observers are not really observers someone a one who observes. but the big self is the one who is observing and you're the one who observes through it, but deep down it is all just the big ball. who is really alive that wil ldie? the person you think you are, just because you are in a body? no,you are not someone who will die , not one , not one with consciosuness who dies.... nah, you're the person you think yourself to be, who possess a beautiful body, you do think your body is real and you're inside, that you have a soul, but that's the illusion, this is all a simulation duuuuuh hurr durr





crtcrcrcrrcrc.jpg
crtcrcrcrrcrc.jpg (14.05 KiB) Viewed 567 times
dont ask him
dontaskme.png
dontaskme.png (10.58 KiB) Viewed 566 times

Dontaskme
Posts: 3824
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: Proof that all is ONENESS

Post by Dontaskme » Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:56 am

Daramantus....there is no separate knower called Dontasme or Daramantus.

There is no separate doer.


The separation is an energetic phenomena unique to the human mind body mechanism expressed through that vehicle as thought..when identification with a thought arises ..this reinforces the idea there is a separate self who owns the thoughts....creating the illusion of a separate knower ....this sense of other is so strong it sticks to the point of no return.

Those that see through the illusion of this duality return to ground base while at the same time are living in the illusion aka the dream of separation. Others never see through the illusion and live in separation for the rest of their lives, which is a tense and defensive way to be often full of confusion fear and misery. People who have awakened to the illusion of separate me still have all the experiences of conceptual knowledge...ie, pain pleasure, misery wealth or poverty etc..but do not take these experiences personally, they can experience the unique capacity to observe theses experiences as temporary illusory visitors that come and go like clouds.
These experiences are energetic in nature they want to exist as everything does, everything is the same energy appearing as different experiences, but notice that when no attention is given to these energetic sensations, is when they dissolve like a puff of smoke..every experience falls away back to the nothingness from where they appeared..they can Only linger when they are being given attention ...that which is given the most attention grows as it feeds off it, ...stop feeding the energy and the thoughts have no chance to settle anywhere or dominate anything....until all that’s left is pure aliveness for no one.

Animals don’t seem to have this strong sense of separate self like humans...if they did they would all be starting up their own religions. That’s what humans have done, they have invented the self and will do just about anything to defend that self at all costs.


.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 1273
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Proof that all is ONENESS

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Tue Dec 12, 2017 8:53 pm

daramantus wrote:
Tue Dec 12, 2017 4:23 am
Dontaskme wrote:
Sun Dec 10, 2017 9:41 pm
:shock: f
daramantus wrote:
Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:21 am


WHy don't you start a chat with the moron called "dontaskme" , and then listen to his "oneness" theory, and you will understand nothing about anything about no one and how nonsense is this
Your attempt to understand nonduality is entertaining ....and you are not my worst nightmare since I stopped believing dreams were real a long time ago....your ga ga bla bla bla comments are all water off a ducks back mate.

You mention the word proof a lot...rather amusing considering the fact that the idea that anything needs to be proved could only arise where there is a sense of a separate self....something that is unique to humans only, since they are the ones that made up the so called entity in the first place using a bunch of letters from their own concocted alphabet.

Proof is evident in the being or the seeing. This already evident proof doesn’t need a second opinion for who or what other oneness would there be to stand as the prover of the proof that’s already evident...?

Now,...try to understand that for any proof to become known about anything at all ..requires a prover....stop and think before you ask for proof, first thing you need to do is prove there is a prover before you can start demanding proof ...when you can do that, then perhaps I’ll start to take you a little more seriously...

.

Have fun proving a prover....let me know what you find and report back to me with your ideas, and your written explanations of those ideas....this is probably going to get a whole lot more entertaining....bye for now.


.

Non duality is a fraud, there is nothing to understand but shitty fallacies, parroting stupid false claims and use some false analogies.


according with the confused puppies called, "Eodnhoj7" and "dontaskme" , reality should be like this image.
Try pi and the golden mean. Pi is considered a transcendental and the Golden Mean as irrational. In these respects you can observe infinity as dually irrational and rational. Infinity as Limitless Limit can observe these two as "Limitless/Irrational/Golden Mean" and "Limit/Reason/Pi". Considering that Pi is literally the universal "line between two points" tell me how the 1 dimensional line is not an infinite structure?

dontaskme wouldnt be a person and there would be no one to answer and no one to talk about anything, in this image, the "observed" and "observer" are one and the same.
Observation observes both and others. In observing others it observes degrees of the self, through unifying universals. Observation is circular in nature, and this circularity allows for a proportional nature to it as "complete". Observation is the manifestation of measurements, in many respects, with the measurement of the self being a primary one through the act of self-reflection.

, objects, without substance, just a big ball of nothing with no one there, and a wholeness, and a confusion of fullness and emptienss, with illusions, people's appearances, and aliens appearing out of nothing to no one, and each person would have the same consciousness, each one would observe it would be the same consciousness, but it wouldnt be separate from anyone, and the wholeness fullness planet that the empty creates out of the aliens simulatory system would be a simulation. real computers? someone to answer to, someone who borns, who is alive? nah, just the mysterious empty fullness big ball , only the utterly all one beings masturbating each for itself, you would be not observing anything and anyone, but another self being who would encounter itself....



makes total sense. this is the WORLDVIEW OF BOTH NONASKME AND THE OTHER IDIOT HERE. of course this world view doesn't exist , not even in cartoons

45465675757.png



only a big ball that doesn't know anything, steve jobs didnt create shit, it was the big ball out of it's power of nothing according to "dontaskme".
If you don't agree with the spherical concept of reality you may disagree with this:
The 24 definitions

1. Deus est monas monadem gignens, in se unum reflectens ardorem.

God is a monad generating a monad, which in the heat (of love) reflects to himself alone.


2. Deus est sphaera infinita cuius centrum est ubique, circumferentia nusquam.

God is an infinite sphere, whose center is everywhere (and) circumference is nowhere.


3. Deus est totus in quolibet sui.

God is all in any of his.


4. Deus est mens orationem generans, continuationem perseuerans.

God is mind generating a word (with) enduring continuity.


5. Deus est quo nihil melius excogitari potest.

God is that where nothing better can be devised.


6. Deus est cuius comparatione substantia est accidens, et accidens nihil.

God is that, in which comparison substance (or essence) is an attribute (or feature), and attribute (or feature) being nothing.


7. Deus est principium sine principio, processus sine variatione, finis sine fine.

God is beginning without beginning, process without variation, end without end.


8. Deus est amor qui plus habitus magis latet.

God is love, which the more is hidden the more we (believe to) have it.


9. Deus est cui soli praesens est quidquid cuius temporis est.

God is that, to whom all is present related to (all what belongs to) time.


10. Deus est cuius posse non numeratur, cuius esse non clauditur, cuius bonitas non terminatur.

God is that, whose ability (or competence) is not numbered, whose being is not limited, whose goodness is not terminated.


11. Deus est super ens, necesse, solus sibi abundanter, sufficienter.

God is above (or beyond) being, (is) necessary and by oneself being sufficient unto himself in abundance.


12. Deus est cuius voluntas deificae et potentiae et sapientiae adaequatur.

God is that, whose will equals (or is according) his divine power and wisdom.


13. Deus est sempiternitas agens in se, semper divisione et habitu.

God is working eternity by himself without division and (without having or gaining) an attribute (or feature).


14. Deus est oppositio nihil mediatione entis.

God is the opposition of nothing by means of being.


15. Deus est vita cuius via in formam est, in unitatem bonitas.

God is life, whose way into form is truth, (and whose way) into unity is goodness.


16. Deus est quod solum voces non significant propter excellentiam, nec mentes intelligunt propter dissimilitudinem.

God (is the) only one because of his excellence, who is not signed by words, and mind (creatures) do not recognise (him) caused by (their) dissimilarity.


17. Deus est intellectus sui solum, praedicationem non recipiens.

God is the concept (or notion) (derived) from himself alone not suffering (or tolerating) a(ny) predicate.


18. Deus est sphaera cuius tot sunt circumferentiae quod puncta.

God is the sphere having as much circumferences as points.


19. Deus est semper movens immobilis.

God is the immobile (but always) moved (one).


20. Deus est qui solus suo intellectu vivit.

God is (the only one) alone living from his self knowledge (or self - awareness).


21. Deus est tenebra in anima post omnem lucem relicta.

God is the darkness in the soul being left after all light.


22. Deus est ex quo est quicquid est non partitione, per quem est non variatione, in quo est quod est non commixtione.

God is (that), from which all is (or exists) that is (or exists) without (him) being divided (or splited); through him (all) is without (him) getting (or being) changed; in him (all) is without him getting (or being) mixed with it.


23. Deus est qui sola ignorantia mente cognoscitur.

God is that, which the mind only knows in ignorance (or in the state of not knowing).


24. Deus est lux quae fractione non clarescit, transit, sed sola deiformitas in re.

God is light, appearing as without refraction, permeating, but only (being) a divine formation in the things.









who are the observers? according to dontaskme the observers are not really observers someone a one who observes. but the big self is the one who is observing and you're the one who observes through it, but deep down it is all just the big ball. who is really alive that wil ldie? the person you think you are, just because you are in a body? no,you are not someone who will die , not one , not one with consciosuness who dies.... nah, you're the person you think yourself to be, who possess a beautiful body, you do think your body is real and you're inside, that you have a soul, but that's the illusion, this is all a simulation duuuuuh hurr durr

Consciousness is the application of dimensions through perpetual measurement, considering that measurement begins with the application of 1 as unified and 1 as unit or individuation, 1 is a perpetual constant that ties people together.






crtcrcrcrrcrc.jpg

dont ask him
dontaskme.png
In regards to the math, of course you have to misquote because that is the only rational recourse you have inorder to give the "impression" you are correct. You had no choice in the matter, so keep going with the insults please. To change subject and correct your error:

1 + 1 = 2

however (1 ≡ 1 ≅ -2,1,2) would be the correct quote. That should help your next round of "thoughts".

daramantus
Posts: 124
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 2:44 pm

Re: Proof that all is ONENESS

Post by daramantus » Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:37 pm

Dontaskme wrote:
Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:56 am
Daramantus....there is no separate knower called Dontasme or Daramantus.

There is no separate doer.


The separation is an energetic phenomena unique to the human mind body mechanism expressed through that vehicle as thought..when identification with a thought arises ..this reinforces the idea there is a separate self who owns the thoughts....creating the illusion of a separate knower ....this sense of other is so strong it sticks to the point of no return.

Those that see through the illusion of this duality return to ground base while at the same time are living in the illusion aka the dream of separation. Others never see through the illusion and live in separation for the rest of their lives, which is a tense and defensive way to be often full of confusion fear and misery. People who have awakened to the illusion of separate me still have all the experiences of conceptual knowledge...ie, pain pleasure, misery wealth or poverty etc..but do not take these experiences personally, they can experience the unique capacity to observe theses experiences as temporary illusory visitors that come and go like clouds.
These experiences are energetic in nature they want to exist as everything does, everything is the same energy appearing as different experiences, but notice that when no attention is given to these energetic sensations, is when they dissolve like a puff of smoke..every experience falls away back to the nothingness from where they appeared..they can Only linger when they are being given attention ...that which is given the most attention grows as it feeds off it, ...stop feeding the energy and the thoughts have no chance to settle anywhere or dominate anything....until all that’s left is pure aliveness for no one.

Animals don’t seem to have this strong sense of separate self like humans...if they did they would all be starting up their own religions. That’s what humans have done, they have invented the self and will do just about anything to defend that self at all costs.


.

"theare is naoh separation man, naoh separata doer, naoh separation, naoh observer, pwerceiver,pelease, agreae witht me, naoh doer, me vs yoo"

you're misusing the word "separate" in your context, as you misuse the word "nothing" "no one" just to distort concepts and use for your own sake of argument, you build your own meaning out of false claims and false concepts, trying a nihilistic approach that means nothing, because you simply can't accept you're wrong and you're a perceiver, an individual who is not connected to anyone else, and you're simply wrong. You're not even connected to the computer you type, mate. not quantum "entangled" or connected, so your "separate" theory, doesn't apply anywhere.

you seem to suffer from separation complexity. You really CAN'T accept reality, you can't accept that you are in your home, you are a perceiver of your computer, you are seeing it because you have healthy eyes and healthy rods and cones, if you weren't the perceiver of the object, you wouldn't need eyes if u werent in your body in the central locus of your consciousness. and I'm here in another part of the world, perceiving my computer, that's not even obvious, it isn't even debatable, you really have problems accepting it, you are like discussing nothing here. It's just that. I don't know why you repeat something that you're clearly wrong, it's laughable.


in regards as this quote "everything is the same energy appearing as different experiences" can you provide me, a scientific proof or ANY evidence of this same "energy" appearing somewhere, does my computer have this energy? does my consciousness have this energy? if so, show me and provide evidence? do you have this energy? if so, provide evidence? where is this energy located and show evidence. <evidence, evidence, I want evidence, not words or make believe "yeah it's this way because I said it"
Last edited by daramantus on Tue Dec 12, 2017 11:06 pm, edited 5 times in total.

daramantus
Posts: 124
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 2:44 pm

Re: Proof that all is ONENESS

Post by daramantus » Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:40 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Tue Dec 12, 2017 8:53 pm
daramantus wrote:
Tue Dec 12, 2017 4:23 am
Dontaskme wrote:
Sun Dec 10, 2017 9:41 pm
:shock: f
Your attempt to understand nonduality is entertaining ....and you are not my worst nightmare since I stopped believing dreams were real a long time ago....your ga ga bla bla bla comments are all water off a ducks back mate.

You mention the word proof a lot...rather amusing considering the fact that the idea that anything needs to be proved could only arise where there is a sense of a separate self....something that is unique to humans only, since they are the ones that made up the so called entity in the first place using a bunch of letters from their own concocted alphabet.

Proof is evident in the being or the seeing. This already evident proof doesn’t need a second opinion for who or what other oneness would there be to stand as the prover of the proof that’s already evident...?

Now,...try to understand that for any proof to become known about anything at all ..requires a prover....stop and think before you ask for proof, first thing you need to do is prove there is a prover before you can start demanding proof ...when you can do that, then perhaps I’ll start to take you a little more seriously...

.

Have fun proving a prover....let me know what you find and report back to me with your ideas, and your written explanations of those ideas....this is probably going to get a whole lot more entertaining....bye for now.


.

Non duality is a fraud, there is nothing to understand but shitty fallacies, parroting stupid false claims and use some false analogies.


according with the confused puppies called, "Eodnhoj7" and "dontaskme" , reality should be like this image.
Try pi and the golden mean. Pi is considered a transcendental and the Golden Mean as irrational. In these respects you can observe infinity as dually irrational and rational. Infinity as Limitless Limit can observe these two as "Limitless/Irrational/Golden Mean" and "Limit/Reason/Pi". Considering that Pi is literally the universal "line between two points" tell me how the 1 dimensional line is not an infinite structure?

dontaskme wouldnt be a person and there would be no one to answer and no one to talk about anything, in this image, the "observed" and "observer" are one and the same.
Observation observes both and others. In observing others it observes degrees of the self, through unifying universals. Observation is circular in nature, and this circularity allows for a proportional nature to it as "complete". Observation is the manifestation of measurements, in many respects, with the measurement of the self being a primary one through the act of self-reflection.

, objects, without substance, just a big ball of nothing with no one there, and a wholeness, and a confusion of fullness and emptienss, with illusions, people's appearances, and aliens appearing out of nothing to no one, and each person would have the same consciousness, each one would observe it would be the same consciousness, but it wouldnt be separate from anyone, and the wholeness fullness planet that the empty creates out of the aliens simulatory system would be a simulation. real computers? someone to answer to, someone who borns, who is alive? nah, just the mysterious empty fullness big ball , only the utterly all one beings masturbating each for itself, you would be not observing anything and anyone, but another self being who would encounter itself....



makes total sense. this is the WORLDVIEW OF BOTH NONASKME AND THE OTHER IDIOT HERE. of course this world view doesn't exist , not even in cartoons

45465675757.png



only a big ball that doesn't know anything, steve jobs didnt create shit, it was the big ball out of it's power of nothing according to "dontaskme".
If you don't agree with the spherical concept of reality you may disagree with this:
The 24 definitions

1. Deus est monas monadem gignens, in se unum reflectens ardorem.

God is a monad generating a monad, which in the heat (of love) reflects to himself alone.


2. Deus est sphaera infinita cuius centrum est ubique, circumferentia nusquam.

God is an infinite sphere, whose center is everywhere (and) circumference is nowhere.


3. Deus est totus in quolibet sui.

God is all in any of his.


4. Deus est mens orationem generans, continuationem perseuerans.

God is mind generating a word (with) enduring continuity.


5. Deus est quo nihil melius excogitari potest.

God is that where nothing better can be devised.


6. Deus est cuius comparatione substantia est accidens, et accidens nihil.

God is that, in which comparison substance (or essence) is an attribute (or feature), and attribute (or feature) being nothing.


7. Deus est principium sine principio, processus sine variatione, finis sine fine.

God is beginning without beginning, process without variation, end without end.


8. Deus est amor qui plus habitus magis latet.

God is love, which the more is hidden the more we (believe to) have it.


9. Deus est cui soli praesens est quidquid cuius temporis est.

God is that, to whom all is present related to (all what belongs to) time.


10. Deus est cuius posse non numeratur, cuius esse non clauditur, cuius bonitas non terminatur.

God is that, whose ability (or competence) is not numbered, whose being is not limited, whose goodness is not terminated.


11. Deus est super ens, necesse, solus sibi abundanter, sufficienter.

God is above (or beyond) being, (is) necessary and by oneself being sufficient unto himself in abundance.


12. Deus est cuius voluntas deificae et potentiae et sapientiae adaequatur.

God is that, whose will equals (or is according) his divine power and wisdom.


13. Deus est sempiternitas agens in se, semper divisione et habitu.

God is working eternity by himself without division and (without having or gaining) an attribute (or feature).


14. Deus est oppositio nihil mediatione entis.

God is the opposition of nothing by means of being.


15. Deus est vita cuius via in formam est, in unitatem bonitas.

God is life, whose way into form is truth, (and whose way) into unity is goodness.


16. Deus est quod solum voces non significant propter excellentiam, nec mentes intelligunt propter dissimilitudinem.

God (is the) only one because of his excellence, who is not signed by words, and mind (creatures) do not recognise (him) caused by (their) dissimilarity.


17. Deus est intellectus sui solum, praedicationem non recipiens.

God is the concept (or notion) (derived) from himself alone not suffering (or tolerating) a(ny) predicate.


18. Deus est sphaera cuius tot sunt circumferentiae quod puncta.

God is the sphere having as much circumferences as points.


19. Deus est semper movens immobilis.

God is the immobile (but always) moved (one).


20. Deus est qui solus suo intellectu vivit.

God is (the only one) alone living from his self knowledge (or self - awareness).


21. Deus est tenebra in anima post omnem lucem relicta.

God is the darkness in the soul being left after all light.


22. Deus est ex quo est quicquid est non partitione, per quem est non variatione, in quo est quod est non commixtione.

God is (that), from which all is (or exists) that is (or exists) without (him) being divided (or splited); through him (all) is without (him) getting (or being) changed; in him (all) is without him getting (or being) mixed with it.


23. Deus est qui sola ignorantia mente cognoscitur.

God is that, which the mind only knows in ignorance (or in the state of not knowing).


24. Deus est lux quae fractione non clarescit, transit, sed sola deiformitas in re.

God is light, appearing as without refraction, permeating, but only (being) a divine formation in the things.









who are the observers? according to dontaskme the observers are not really observers someone a one who observes. but the big self is the one who is observing and you're the one who observes through it, but deep down it is all just the big ball. who is really alive that wil ldie? the person you think you are, just because you are in a body? no,you are not someone who will die , not one , not one with consciosuness who dies.... nah, you're the person you think yourself to be, who possess a beautiful body, you do think your body is real and you're inside, that you have a soul, but that's the illusion, this is all a simulation duuuuuh hurr durr

Consciousness is the application of dimensions through perpetual measurement, considering that measurement begins with the application of 1 as unified and 1 as unit or individuation, 1 is a perpetual constant that ties people together.






crtcrcrcrrcrc.jpg

dont ask him
dontaskme.png
In regards to the math, of course you have to misquote because that is the only rational recourse you have inorder to give the "impression" you are correct. You had no choice in the matter, so keep going with the insults please. To change subject and correct your error:

1 + 1 = 2

however (1 ≡ 1 ≅ -2,1,2) would be the correct quote. That should help your next round of "thoughts".
which god is the true one? zeus which isn't omniscient? or flying spaguetti monster? or the god that is the "absolute" "infinity"????
no wait, there is no god, anywhere, in anything, no absolute powerful god, no infinity god, not any of this bs. so all discarded.
http://debunkgod.com/
Last edited by daramantus on Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 1273
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Proof that all is ONENESS

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:41 pm

daramantus wrote:
Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:37 pm
Dontaskme wrote:
Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:56 am
Daramantus....there is no separate knower called Dontasme or Daramantus.

There is no separate doer.


The separation is an energetic phenomena unique to the human mind body mechanism expressed through that vehicle as thought..when identification with a thought arises ..this reinforces the idea there is a separate self who owns the thoughts....creating the illusion of a separate knower ....this sense of other is so strong it sticks to the point of no return.

Those that see through the illusion of this duality return to ground base while at the same time are living in the illusion aka the dream of separation. Others never see through the illusion and live in separation for the rest of their lives, which is a tense and defensive way to be often full of confusion fear and misery. People who have awakened to the illusion of separate me still have all the experiences of conceptual knowledge...ie, pain pleasure, misery wealth or poverty etc..but do not take these experiences personally, they can experience the unique capacity to observe theses experiences as temporary illusory visitors that come and go like clouds.
These experiences are energetic in nature they want to exist as everything does, everything is the same energy appearing as different experiences, but notice that when no attention is given to these energetic sensations, is when they dissolve like a puff of smoke..every experience falls away back to the nothingness from where they appeared..they can Only linger when they are being given attention ...that which is given the most attention grows as it feeds off it, ...stop feeding the energy and the thoughts have no chance to settle anywhere or dominate anything....until all that’s left is pure aliveness for no one.

Animals don’t seem to have this strong sense of separate self like humans...if they did they would all be starting up their own religions. That’s what humans have done, they have invented the self and will do just about anything to defend that self at all costs.


.

"theare is naoh separation man, naoh separata doer, naoh separation, naoh observer, pwerceiver,pelease, agreae witht me, naoh doer, me vs yoo"

you seem to suffer from separation complexity. You really CAN'T accept reality, you can't accept that you are in your home, you are a perceiver of your computer, you are seeing it because you have healthy eyes and healthy rods and cones, if you weren't the perceiver of the object, you wouldn't need eyes if u werent in your body in the central locus of your consciousness. and I'm here in another part of the world, perceiving my computer, that's not even obvious, that's not debatable, you really have problems accepting it, you are like discussing nothing here. It's just that. I don't know why you repeat something that you're clearly wrong, it's laughable.
So according to you, everything is unified as a dividing line?

daramantus
Posts: 124
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 2:44 pm

Re: Proof that all is ONENESS

Post by daramantus » Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:45 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:41 pm
daramantus wrote:
Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:37 pm
Dontaskme wrote:
Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:56 am
Daramantus....there is no separate knower called Dontasme or Daramantus.

There is no separate doer.


The separation is an energetic phenomena unique to the human mind body mechanism expressed through that vehicle as thought..when identification with a thought arises ..this reinforces the idea there is a separate self who owns the thoughts....creating the illusion of a separate knower ....this sense of other is so strong it sticks to the point of no return.

Those that see through the illusion of this duality return to ground base while at the same time are living in the illusion aka the dream of separation. Others never see through the illusion and live in separation for the rest of their lives, which is a tense and defensive way to be often full of confusion fear and misery. People who have awakened to the illusion of separate me still have all the experiences of conceptual knowledge...ie, pain pleasure, misery wealth or poverty etc..but do not take these experiences personally, they can experience the unique capacity to observe theses experiences as temporary illusory visitors that come and go like clouds.
These experiences are energetic in nature they want to exist as everything does, everything is the same energy appearing as different experiences, but notice that when no attention is given to these energetic sensations, is when they dissolve like a puff of smoke..every experience falls away back to the nothingness from where they appeared..they can Only linger when they are being given attention ...that which is given the most attention grows as it feeds off it, ...stop feeding the energy and the thoughts have no chance to settle anywhere or dominate anything....until all that’s left is pure aliveness for no one.

Animals don’t seem to have this strong sense of separate self like humans...if they did they would all be starting up their own religions. That’s what humans have done, they have invented the self and will do just about anything to defend that self at all costs.


.

"theare is naoh separation man, naoh separata doer, naoh separation, naoh observer, pwerceiver,pelease, agreae witht me, naoh doer, me vs yoo"

you seem to suffer from separation complexity. You really CAN'T accept reality, you can't accept that you are in your home, you are a perceiver of your computer, you are seeing it because you have healthy eyes and healthy rods and cones, if you weren't the perceiver of the object, you wouldn't need eyes if u werent in your body in the central locus of your consciousness. and I'm here in another part of the world, perceiving my computer, that's not even obvious, that's not debatable, you really have problems accepting it, you are like discussing nothing here. It's just that. I don't know why you repeat something that you're clearly wrong, it's laughable.
So according to you, everything is unified as a dividing line?
we don't know everything, so we can't make any theories about it, so, no, I don't believing in any " unifying theory" . and each "theory of everything" has failed in the past. because there is no such thing to begin with. Some people have hard time accepting it, hard time accepting that we don't know the unknown, actually we know little to nothing. We can only know from the frame of knowledge available to us, not beyond it. and what is beyond the beyond and outside it. It's like, there really is no such thing as "everything unified"
Last edited by daramantus on Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:55 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests