~ The Brilliant Light of the Spotless Sun Now Shines Upon the New Citizen of the World ~

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 7078
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: ~ The Brilliant Light of the Spotless Sun Now Shines Upon the New Citizen of the World ~

Post by Dontaskme » Tue Apr 17, 2018 1:20 pm

Arising_uk wrote:
Sun Apr 15, 2018 8:58 pm

It explains your view of things but how do you explain if you and I leave the room when we get back we both see the candle burnt to the same length?
It's a view, a knowing event known as witnessed, but the knowing is not a claimed knowing by a ''someone'' ..for there is no one to claim knowing. Consciousness is the only knowing there is, and that cannot be known for it is the knowing. There is no you and I that knows, for these are concepts already known in consciousness. The you and I is a known concept in consciousness...No you and I have ever been seen, these are known concepts known to the invisible seer...images of the imageless...aka consciousness.

No human being has ever seen a candle burn down, this event is known to consciousness only. We both appear to see the same event because we both have the same consciousness that knows, consciousness is the only seer, the only knower. Both you and I are not two separate consciousnesses, there is only one consciousness. The you and I is a concept in that...that's already seeing and knowing.

Seeing and knowing doesn't have a title or location, it is no thing and everywhere at once.
Arising_uk wrote:
Sun Apr 15, 2018 8:58 pm
You also haven't answered how me and the squirrel both run for the same tree when the wolf is about?
Because running up the tree when danger threatens is an automatic response to danger, there is no thinker in the squirrel or the human being that stops to think about whether it should run up the same tree away from danger, it just happens spontaneously and automatically as natures natural program running itself, consciousness does not have to think about doing what is already held in the program to do, it knows what to do because it's recording all life events as and when they happen in the immediate moment, so all action is a unitary automatic function, no thing is doing anything except consciousness alone. The body of the squirrel and the body of you is the sensor mechanism that instructs an action to be performed, this is all done within the consciousness, there is nothing outside of consciousness, except the re-acting, re-play, re-membering, re-calling, of what's already happened unconsciously...this is the dual nature of the mind at play, the un-conscious and the conscious interacting with each other, the same one being two.

.

.

User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 11988
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: ~ The Brilliant Light of the Spotless Sun Now Shines Upon the New Citizen of the World ~

Post by Arising_uk » Tue Apr 17, 2018 7:20 pm

Dontaskme wrote:It's a view, a knowing event known as witnessed, but the knowing is not a claimed knowing by a ''someone'' ..for there is no one to claim knowing. Consciousness is the only knowing there is, and that cannot be known for it is the knowing. There is no you and I that knows, for these are concepts already known in consciousness. The you and I is a known concept in consciousness...No you and I have ever been seen, these are known concepts known to the invisible seer...images of the imageless...aka consciousness.

No human being has ever seen a candle burn down, this event is known to consciousness only. We both appear to see the same event because we both have the same consciousness that knows, consciousness is the only seer, the only knower. Both you and I are not two separate consciousnesses, there is only one consciousness. The you and I is a concept in that...that's already seeing and knowing. ...
How do you explain colour-blindness then?
Seeing and knowing doesn't have a title or location, it is no thing and everywhere at once.
A contradiction and therefore always false.
Because running up the tree when danger threatens is an automatic response to danger, there is no thinker in the squirrel or the human being that stops to think about whether it should run up the same tree away from danger, it just happens spontaneously and automatically as natures natural program running itself, consciousness does not have to think about doing what is already held in the program to do, it knows what to do because it's recording all life events as and when they happen in the immediate moment, so all action is a unitary automatic function, no thing is doing anything except consciousness alone. The body of the squirrel and the body of you is the sensor mechanism that instructs an action to be performed, this is all done within the consciousness, there is nothing outside of consciousness, except the re-acting, re-play, re-membering, re-calling, of what's already happened unconsciously...this is the dual nature of the mind at play, the un-conscious and the conscious interacting with each other, the same one being two. ...
What are these bodies you refer to? As I thought you said there are no such things.

You miss my point, how is it they both perceive that there is an object that we call a tree there? Also, the human does need to think in such a situation as unlike for the squirrel the tree may not be a suitable one for the occasion.

User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 7078
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: ~ The Brilliant Light of the Spotless Sun Now Shines Upon the New Citizen of the World ~

Post by Dontaskme » Wed Apr 18, 2018 7:40 am

Arising_uk wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 7:20 pm
How do you explain colour-blindness then?
It's a part of natures programming, some brains are wired up differently that's all, but has little to do and takes nothing away from consciousness itself aka the energy source that all brains are plugged into.

Seeing and knowing doesn't have a title or location, it is no thing and everywhere at once.
Arising_uk wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 7:20 pm
A contradiction and therefore always false.
It's only false in relation to it being true.
Arising_uk wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 7:20 pm
What are these bodies you refer to? As I thought you said there are no such things.
A body exists as a concept known by consciousness that is not a body. In the same context electricity is not a tv set, but the tv set cannot operate without it. The body cannot operate without the input of consciousness, the body being the action figure, a phantom...a dream character in the dreamer which is not a thing.
Arising_uk wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 7:20 pm
You miss my point, how is it they both perceive that there is an object that we call a tree there? Also, the human does need to think in such a situation as unlike for the squirrel the tree may not be a suitable one for the occasion.

No I didn't miss your point, you missed mine. They both perceived the tree, because they both have the same consciousness and for that reason there is no ''both'' there, there is only consciousness and it's story/dream there / HERE.

The story of the running up the tree from the wolf is part of the program consciousness is running at a particular moment in spacetime duality, it is consciousness playing a role in the story acting out as and through the action figures, and at the same time watching itself preform the actions.

No human thinking involved when faced with immediate danger, but on reflection that the tree is not suitable, there is a delay in an alternative action being taken,all part of natures program. No thing is doing anything except the conceptual idea there is.
Nothing is done yet nothing is left undone.

There is so much more to explain the simulation that is life appearing real, it would probably take forever to explain it all, so obviously, the mind will chime in each time with a new question...the deconstructing of old conditioned belief systems is in full swing now thanks to the internet..aka the inner net where the singularity is in one place at the same time, but the mind is going to be confused and will probably reject this new information because it's not familiar with it, but over time it will start to recognise this knowledge as the real truth of itself.

.


.

User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 11988
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: ~ The Brilliant Light of the Spotless Sun Now Shines Upon the New Citizen of the World ~

Post by Arising_uk » Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:39 pm

Dontaskme wrote:It's a part of natures programming, some brains are wired up differently that's all, but has little to do and takes nothing away from consciousness itself aka the energy source that all brains are plugged into. ...
I think you want your cake and to eat it as you want these 'brains' when faced with issues about how this 'consciousness' works but also assert that these 'brains' don't exist? If you have these 'brains' that are wired-up differently then you have objects that aren't part of your 'consciousness' but you deny such things exist?
It's only false in relation to it being true.
No, it's always false in that the relation is asserting something is and isn't the case.
A body exists as a concept known by consciousness that is not a body. In the same context electricity is not a tv set, but the tv set cannot operate without it. The body cannot operate without the input of consciousness, the body being the action figure, a phantom...a dream character in the dreamer which is not a thing. ...
Ok, what you propose is Bishop Berkley's Idealism with your 'consciousness' as his 'God' and the idea that to be is to be perceived. Now ignoring what Kant said about the noumena and phenomena, I think fair enough as its a philosophy that has legs but then my question is that if everything is consciousness then what is conscious of your 'consciousness', as surely 'it' also can't exist without a 'consciousness' being conscious of it?
Arising_uk wrote:No I didn't miss your point, you missed mine. They both perceived the tree, because they both have the same consciousness and for that reason there is no ''both'' there, there is only consciousness and it's story/dream there / HERE. ...
How can there only be one consciousness as according to your metaphysic something else must be conscious of 'it' for it to be?
The story of the running up the tree from the wolf is part of the program consciousness is running at a particular moment in spacetime duality, ...
You do understand that the term 'spacetime' does not describe a duality?
it is consciousness playing a role in the story acting out as and through the action figures, and at the same time watching itself preform the actions. ...
Given that I think Kant still not disproved this is all wishful thinking.
No human thinking involved when faced with immediate danger, but on reflection that the tree is not suitable, there is a delay in an alternative action being taken,all part of natures program. ...
And yet 'danger' is something that has to be taught?
No thing is doing anything except the conceptual idea there is. ...
What is doing this what that is doing this conceptual idea?
Nothing is done yet nothing is left undone. ...
Just another contradiction.
There is so much more to explain the simulation that is life appearing real, it would probably take forever to explain it all, so obviously, the mind will chime in each time with a new question...the deconstructing of old conditioned belief systems is in full swing now thanks to the internet..aka the inner net where the singularity is in one place at the same time, but the mind is going to be confused and will probably reject this new information because it's not familiar with it, but over time it will start to recognise this knowledge as the real truth of itself.
Well let's hope that one day this inner net will stumble upon Western Philosophy as most of what you say is already old hat.

Do you understand the difference between a simulation and an emulation?

Do understand that the Singularity is predicated exactly upon the idea that Dualism is true?

User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 7078
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: ~ The Brilliant Light of the Spotless Sun Now Shines Upon the New Citizen of the World ~

Post by Dontaskme » Wed Apr 18, 2018 7:08 pm

Arising_uk wrote:
Wed Apr 18, 2018 6:39 pm

Do understand that the Singularity is predicated exactly upon the idea that Dualism is true?
I understand that Nonduality is duality.

As for the rest of your questions, answer them yourself, I'm tired of repeating myself to you.

.

User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 11988
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: ~ The Brilliant Light of the Spotless Sun Now Shines Upon the New Citizen of the World ~

Post by Arising_uk » Wed Apr 18, 2018 7:22 pm

But my question was a new one?

Given you say it's all one consciousness and to be is to be a consciousness what is the consciousness that is conscious of your proposed one consciousness? As if nothing is conscious of it then by your metaphysic it cannot be.

User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 11988
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: ~ The Brilliant Light of the Spotless Sun Now Shines Upon the New Citizen of the World ~

Post by Arising_uk » Wed Apr 18, 2018 7:32 pm

Dontaskme wrote:
I understand that Nonduality is duality. ...
Then it's not a nonduality?

Dualism is different than your 'duality' I think, at least in Philosophy it is.
As for the rest of your questions, answer them yourself, I'm tired of repeating myself to you.
How could I? Its your metaphysic.

User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 7078
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: ~ The Brilliant Light of the Spotless Sun Now Shines Upon the New Citizen of the World ~

Post by Dontaskme » Thu Apr 19, 2018 7:44 am

Dontaskme wrote:I understand that Nonduality is duality. ...
Arising_uk wrote:
Wed Apr 18, 2018 7:32 pm
Then it's not a nonduality?Dualism is different than your 'duality' I think, at least in Philosophy it is.
Nonduality which is duality is not a philosophy, it's an understanding that does away with all philosophies and all isms. It's the emptiness in which all philosophies and isms arise and fall.

Dontaskme wrote:As for the rest of your questions, answer them yourself, I'm tired of repeating myself to you.
Arising_uk wrote:
Wed Apr 18, 2018 7:32 pm
How could I? Its your metaphysic.

The meta philosopher, is just an idea, it exists as a conception, and all concepts are just ideas about ideas about ideas, arising and falling in emptiness, add infinitum.

Stop looking for answers outside yourself then, look within yourself. Why are you even talking to me about this subject if it's not your subject, if it's only my subject, why even attempt to discuss this with me, you make no sense to do that, in fact every reply you have ever made to me has made absolutely no sense to me whatsoever. What are you trying to prove or disprove here, all you seem to want to do is question what is being talked about, and then when I explain myself, you then question that explanation, and so on and so on...so what it is you are trying to understand, and what makes you think I can make you understand what I'm talking about if all you can say is it's my metaphysics.

If that was true , then why are you even here discussing something that only belongs to me, is mine and only mine, and for no one else but me, and no one else has privy to it?

Forgive me for feeling a little confused about your motive for discussing such subjects as these. What do you want me to say, it's like you are wanting me to say something that you can agree with..is that what you want me to do ? I'm not sure what it is you want me to say?

I cannot talk to you if you are not prepared to listen to what I am saying, I've been giving you the answers, but are you listening?

I have no more questions in my life, but it seems you are still a seeker, whereas I am not. So I'm not going to get yanked back into seeking with you or anyone, I have all the answers, but if you don't want my answers, then stop talking to me, all you have to do is say I don't want your answers thankyou.

And that's basically it.





.

User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 11988
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: ~ The Brilliant Light of the Spotless Sun Now Shines Upon the New Citizen of the World ~

Post by Arising_uk » Sun Apr 22, 2018 2:09 am

Dontaskme wrote:Nonduality which is duality is not a philosophy, ...
Well ignoring that this is just a contradiction you are right, it's not, however it is a metaphysic and you have a kind of epistemology in there so if you can also get an ethic from it, that is, it can allow you to make ethical judgements then it might be on the way to being a philosophy.
it's an understanding that does away with all philosophies and all isms. It's the emptiness in which all philosophies and isms arise and fall. ...
Not really as its basically Idealism in new clothes.
The meta philosopher, is just an idea, it exists as a conception, and all concepts are just ideas about ideas about ideas, arising and falling in emptiness, add infinitum. ...
What's a 'meta philosopher'?

So what is conceiving your 'one consciouness'?
Stop looking for answers outside yourself then, look within yourself. ...
I thought you said there was no outside myself? How can you have a 'within yourself' if there is no outside yourself?
Why are you even talking to me about this subject if it's not your subject, ...
I'm talking to you about this because philosophy is my subject and you are posting upon a philosophy forum.
if it's only my subject, why even attempt to discuss this with me, you make no sense to do that, ...
Because you are the one with the answers about your metaphysic?
in fact every reply you have ever made to me has made absolutely no sense to me whatsoever. ...
Oh well, but I'm not necessarily just talking to you.
What are you trying to prove or disprove here, all you seem to want to do is question what is being talked about, and then when I explain myself, you then question that explanation, and so on and so on...so what it is you are trying to understand, and what makes you think I can make you understand what I'm talking about if all you can say is it's my metaphysics. ...
I understand what you are talking about, I just wonder how you solve some of the obvious issues your metaphysic has so I ask you.
If that was true , then why are you even here discussing something that only belongs to me, is mine and only mine, and for no one else but me, and no one else has privy to it?
I don't say it's yours only, Idealism has a long history in Philosophy I just wonder how yours differs.
Forgive me for feeling a little confused about your motive for discussing such subjects as these. ...
Philosophy and philosophising?

You have noticed the title of this forum haven't you?
What do you want me to say, it's like you are wanting me to say something that you can agree with..is that what you want me to do ? I'm not sure what it is you want me to say? ...
I don't want you to say anything if you don't want. It is you who are here on a philosophy forum stating your metaphysic, what kind of response did you think you'd get?
I cannot talk to you if you are not prepared to listen to what I am saying, I've been giving you the answers, but are you listening?
Sure am but much of it is contradiction and assertion with very little evidence other than just you believe it to be true so it must be true and given that, so far, Kant's distinction is unchallenged I wonder how you know so much about the noumena let alone that it is a 'consciousness'?
I have no more questions in my life, but it seems you are still a seeker, whereas I am not. So I'm not going to get yanked back into seeking with you or anyone, I have all the answers, but if you don't want my answers, then stop talking to me, all you have to do is say I don't want your answers thankyou. ...
It's a philosophy forum?

Personally I'm pleased that you have all the answers to get you through the day and I'm well aware that nothing will challenge your mindset but given I think your answers full of holes and that this is a philosophy forum where others might be reading your stuff I hope that raising the questions I do may give others pause for thought.
And that's basically it.
Thank you for being clear about your position on such matters philosophical.

User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 7078
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: ~ The Brilliant Light of the Spotless Sun Now Shines Upon the New Citizen of the World ~

Post by Dontaskme » Sun Apr 22, 2018 10:13 am

I cannot talk to you if you are not prepared to listen to what I am saying, I've been giving you the answers, but are you listening?
Arising_uk wrote:
Sun Apr 22, 2018 2:09 am
Sure am but much of it is contradiction and assertion with very little evidence other than just you believe it to be true so it must be true and given that, so far, Kant's distinction is unchallenged I wonder how you know so much about the noumena let alone that it is a 'consciousness'?
All beliefs are equally valid to the believer depending on what they believe via their own experience. Who can refute another persons experience?
And is why philosophy that dictates the idea of contradiction is false from the off set, it's basically saying there is only one true way to perceive reality. This idea is totally flawed. Only you have the answers to your own questions.

You are responding to me and my ideas only here, I do not see anyone else involved in this conversation at present do you, how can you be talking to others about what we are discussing here..where are these so called others you are talking to right now?
Right now are you not the only one in conversation with me ?

Others maybe reading, but the reader is the same in every body, each body is seeing the exact same words that are being expressed here, but they are not involved are they? it's just you and me talking right now..you are not talking to others, what you mean by that is you are talking with yourself because we are all the same reader.

I have already told you, I have all the answers, I know this because I also know life does not question itself, only the mind is capable of questioning itself, because the mind is responsible for the sense of there being a 'separate self'...questions can only arise to the sense of a separate self.
This sense of ''other'' is the I AM presence aware of itself. So the only valid question here is to ask WHO is aware of itself...and what is this awareness that is aware of itself? ..

Can you see awareness, no, awareness is what's already looking inseparable from what it is looking at, and there is your answer to your question of who. It's all YOU...so obviously everything that is real for you is your own, it's sourced in you alone...how in the heck do you think the way you view reality can be refuted and by whom? do you not see a flaw in that philosophy?

This is my personal philosophy ..and every body else has their personal philosophy, we're all philosophers as long as we hold to the illusory sense that there is a 'separate self', but the philosopher is a fiction..because philosophers are knowledge, and yet life as it is. Life is not a philosopher..it has no knowledge of itself, life is a verb. This knowing too is a philosophy, since knowledge can only inform that reality belonging to a 'separate self' is illusory...and that the ' separate self' is just an idea..it's just one dream of a multitude of dreams, ideas within awareness which is empty.




Arising_uk wrote:
Sun Apr 22, 2018 2:09 am
It's a philosophy forum?
Yes it is.
Arising_uk wrote:
Sun Apr 22, 2018 2:09 am
Personally I'm pleased that you have all the answers to get you through the day and I'm well aware that nothing will challenge your mindset but given I think your answers full of holes and that this is a philosophy forum where others might be reading your stuff I hope that raising the questions I do may give others pause for thought.
There is only ONE READER. We all are reading the same words, but how those words are interpreted are varied according to the perceiver, as you've already proved to yourself ..in your interpretation of what is true and real for me... is full of holes for you.

Now for me, there is nothing to challenge in another if what one already believes is true for that believer.

There does come a point of realising that to be challenging another view point is seen as stupid and pointless. Philosophy is flawed if it believes it can do that. Yes, we can disagree or agree with someones view point, but not challenge it as if that view point is not true, for how the dickens would someone else know what's real or not real in the mind of another..we each create our own realities...as holographic images of the one light reflecting itself. And that is a realisation that philosophers have yet to accept, and not place ideas expressed into tight little boxes of this is right and this is wrong.

beyond ideas of wrongdoing or rightdoing, we will all meet, in the empty place.

All knowledge is nothing but appearances, dreams at best, here today gone tomorrow.

While the ''what is'' of life is always the same as it ever was/is.

.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests