Zarathustra wrote: ↑Wed Jul 21, 2021 12:41 pm
...how can one describe or explain, something one has never experienced directly by oneself?
I've never been to Boston. I've never been a woman. I've never been Peruvian, or sawed myself in two, or calculated the radius of the moon. Yet all those things are real, regardless of my inability to explain them, and my lack of personal, direct experience.
Zarathustra wrote: ↑Wed Jul 21, 2021 12:41 pm
Can death be a metaphysical subject?
The obvious problem would be, how can one describe or explain, something one has never experienced directly by oneself?
Would it be, whatever is said about death, out of one's imagination or from the observations of others deaths?
Hence, can it ever be true or accurate?
Death can never be KNOWN, described, explained or experienced. So death is not available as a TRUE or accurate subject up for debate. A subject requires an awareness of knowledge.
So, you are pessimistic about death being the topic for metaphysical considerations and debates. Is that right?
No, that's wrong.
Death is not a metaphysical subject to discuss for reasons I said earlier and will repeat.
You have never known death.
You can only debate what you know, never what you do not know.
Zarathustra wrote: ↑Wed Jul 21, 2021 12:41 pm
...how can one describe or explain, something one has never experienced directly by oneself?
I've never been to Boston. I've never been a woman. I've never been Peruvian, or sawed myself in two, or calculated the radius of the moon. Yet all those things are real, regardless of my inability to explain them, and my lack of personal, direct experience.
Zarathustra wrote: ↑Wed Jul 21, 2021 12:41 pm
...how can one describe or explain, something one has never experienced directly by oneself?
I've never been to Boston. I've never been a woman. I've never been Peruvian, or sawed myself in two, or calculated the radius of the moon. Yet all those things are real, regardless of my inability to explain them, and my lack of personal, direct experience.
So what's the question?
The question is the answer.
Who - what's asking.
I was asking Zarathustra.
I know all about your "questions." We've already talked about those.
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Aug 16, 2021 7:41 pm
I've never been to Boston. I've never been a woman. I've never been Peruvian, or sawed myself in two, or calculated the radius of the moon. Yet all those things are real, regardless of my inability to explain them, and my lack of personal, direct experience.
So what's the question?
The question is the answer.
Who - what's asking.
I was asking Zarathustra.
I know all about your "questions." We've already talked about those.
I want to know about his.
Well we all have the same capacity to ask the same questions in different ways, just as we all have the same naked body under our different layers of clothing.
Why are you so stupid?
Why do you even want to know anything at all...when you claim God is the only true truth. If you knew that honestly, you'd have no NEED for more knowledge, you'd just shut the fuck up....but you cannot shut up can you Mr Can can't?
Zarathustra wrote: ↑Wed Jul 21, 2021 12:41 pm
...how can one describe or explain, something one has never experienced directly by oneself?
I've never been to Boston. I've never been a woman. I've never been Peruvian, or sawed myself in two, or calculated the radius of the moon. Yet all those things are real, regardless of my inability to explain them, and my lack of personal, direct experience.
So what's the question?
You seem to have been confused with something is real and knowing and experiencing death directly by yourself.
The statement that something is real is, your feeling or judgment on some object which is possible under the condition that you are alive, perceiving and feeling / judging some object or situation.
Knowing death or experiencing death is the situation or statement which are not possible for the subject to directly engage with the situation or process without actual death, because he / she is dead. If the subject is alive then it is impossible to know or experience death directly because he / she is alive (not dead).
Last edited by Zarathustra on Thu Aug 26, 2021 1:18 am, edited 6 times in total.
Zarathustra wrote: ↑Wed Jul 21, 2021 12:41 pm
...how can one describe or explain, something one has never experienced directly by oneself?
I've never been to Boston. I've never been a woman. I've never been Peruvian, or sawed myself in two, or calculated the radius of the moon. Yet all those things are real, regardless of my inability to explain them, and my lack of personal, direct experience.
So what's the question?
You seem to have been confused with something is real and knowing and experiencing something directly by yourself.
Not at all. I'm just pointing out that one can speak quite coherently and accurately, in fact, about something one has not personally experienced. For instance, a person who has never had cancer can make a very fine oncologist. One can speak accurately about drug abuse without abusing drugs. One can know plenty about the moon without having personally been on it.
What's the question about dying that can't be answered without us dying first?
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Aug 26, 2021 1:10 am
Not at all. I'm just pointing out that one can speak quite coherently and accurately, in fact, about something one has not personally experienced. For instance, a person who has never had cancer can make a very fine oncologist. One can speak accurately about drug abuse without abusing drugs. One can know plenty about the moon without having personally been on it.
What's the question about dying that can't be answered without us dying first?
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Aug 26, 2021 1:10 am
Not at all. I'm just pointing out that one can speak quite coherently and accurately, in fact, about something one has not personally experienced. For instance, a person who has never had cancer can make a very fine oncologist. One can speak accurately about drug abuse without abusing drugs. One can know plenty about the moon without having personally been on it.
What's the question about dying that can't be answered without us dying first?
Once dead, one cannot know, or answer anything at all. Is it not what death is?
Zarathustra wrote: ↑Thu Aug 26, 2021 1:19 am
Once dead, one cannot know, or answer anything at all. Is it not what death is?
Apparently not.
But let's suppose this: suppose one Man had died, and been resurrected. Could He tell us anything about death?
No man has ever been resurrected from death.
The story of resurrection is pointing to the idea that there is no one who lives, so no one who can die. And that would be the same as what nonduality teaches.
Tell it like it really is, and stop twisting things around to suit your own warped out of shape ideas.
Zarathustra wrote: ↑Thu Aug 26, 2021 1:19 am
Once dead, one cannot know, or answer anything at all. Is it not what death is?
Apparently not.
But let's suppose this: suppose one Man had died, and been resurrected. Could He tell us anything about death?
No man has ever been resurrected from death.
If you insist so, then your argument is with God, not me:
"The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you put to death by hanging Him on a cross. He is the one whom God exalted to His right hand as a Prince and a Savior, to grant repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins." (Acts 5:30-31)