Why humans can't get rid of their egos ?

[Atla]

Maybe one day you children will comprehend that the Absolute doesn't have a mental nature either. "As a whole" it doesn't know anything.

[AlexW]

This associating the ONE Mind with 'thoughts' is a perfect example of just how the human brain can twist and distort things, by, and into, what it BELIEVES is true. There is a perfectly reasonable explanation of WHY the Mind was/is associated with, and is seen as, thinking/thoughts/the brain, et cetera, but this is long way down the track of UNDERSTANDING, Itself.

Let me ask you the same question about your statement above:
What is written here in the quote could itself be twisted and distorted, correct? Or is this just NOT possible?

[Dontaskme]

Now, is a human brain a thing that knows, or is a human brain a known thing that cannot know?

A human brain THINKS. Whereas the one and only Mind KNOWS.

I would put it.. The knower aka (Pure Awareness) ''pure'' in that it's not-known, but IS...and the 'known thought brain' have to be present in the exact same instant, knower and known being ONE instantaneous knowing without separation.... but then something magical happens ..and that is Awareness of thought creates the illusion of separation... for example: the thought (''Brain'' ) is like an add on to what's already and always never not (Here Now Nowhere Pure Awareness) with no concept / image of itself...except as a ''thought'' an aspect of it, inseparable from it.

Digging deeper, it is seen by Empty Pure Awareness that there is no actual exact location for it's existence, nor does the thought that is being awared by IT.
So in essence nothing is happening inside a 'Brain'...because a 'Brain' is just a thought without no locatable identity.

Awareness is first and last primary always and never not here now nowhere...else no 'thought' can be known.

Nothing knows how these words expressed as thoughts, or thoughts expressed as words aka knowledge are happening or why, it's all just appearing out of nothingness now here nowhere.

To claim a ''Brain'' can think, is like saying a kettle or a lamp-post can think. Thinking is an add on factor, an illusory extra factor that is the magic of nothingness appearing as something.

Even the words ''Mind'' and 'Awareness'' and ''Consciousness'' ''Something'' and ''Nothing'' are just empty non-locatable 'thoughts' known by this unknown mystery that IS this apparent knowing.

.

[Dontaskme]

Maybe one day you children will comprehend that the Absolute doesn't have a mental nature either. "As a whole" it doesn't know anything.

Only the mind knows itself as a mirror reflection of the Absolute.

Reflections don't know anything of the Absolute.

.

[Atla]

Maybe one day you children will comprehend that the Absolute doesn't have a mental nature either. "As a whole" it doesn't know anything.

Only the mind knows itself as a mirror reflection of the Absolute.

Reflections don't know anything of the Absolute.

.

Not you DAM, you will never comprehend. You just don't have what it takes to become a nondualist one day. I'm sorry.

[AlexW]

Maybe one day you children will comprehend that the Absolute doesn't have a mental nature either. "As a whole" it doesn't know anything.

Of course it doesn’t have a specific nature, it also doesn’t know anything in the way we conventionally define knowledge.
It only knows absolute truth, itself, which is not what we would call knowing.
Thus it never knows separation, objects, things or any concept- it only knows absolutely by being the Absolute (if that makes any sense to you, but it’s rather awkward to express in language )

[Dontaskme]

The human brain, in a sense, can NOT know, as it is only a "processor" as such, as it can only 'give out' what has been 'put into' it. The human brain can NOT 'know' because it really can only 'think'. Although the human brain may 'think, it knows' what is true, et cetera, only through AGREEMENT can 'what IS 'really True' be KNOWN.

What is being expressed here is just known knowledge. No ''thing'' knows knowledge. All knowledge is known by not-a-thing. It's untold, unwritten, a dream story believed to be real.

Direct Experience of Being doesn't require an agreement of it's being to BE.. IT IS without doubt or error. It's this direct stateless state experience of being that makes no claim to know or to be. IT just IS

'Agreements' are within the illusory realm of separation aka identification with ''thought'' which are magical but empty add on effects of Being...nothing more than an untold, unwritten, dream story, make believe, within Nothing Being Itself.

.

[Dontaskme]

Maybe one day you children will comprehend that the Absolute doesn't have a mental nature either. "As a whole" it doesn't know anything.

Only the mind knows itself as a mirror reflection of the Absolute.

Reflections don't know anything of the Absolute.

.

Not you DAM, you will never comprehend. You just don't have what it takes to become a nondualist one day. I'm sorry.

Who cares!

[Atla]

Maybe one day you children will comprehend that the Absolute doesn't have a mental nature either. "As a whole" it doesn't know anything.

Of course it doesn’t have a specific nature, it also doesn’t know anything in the way we conventionally define knowledge.
It only knows absolute truth, itself, which is not what we would call knowing.
Thus it never knows separation, objects, things or any concept- it only knows absolutely by being the Absolute (if that makes any sense to you, but it’s rather awkward to express in language )

No, it doesn't know itself by being itself. Instead, it's simply itself.

There is a circular thought pattern in your own head that made you wake up, but at the end, this needs to be discarded as well. Projecting this circularity onto the Absolute is one of the last illusions.

[Dontaskme]

Maybe one day you children will comprehend that the Absolute doesn't have a mental nature either. "As a whole" it doesn't know anything.

There is No Knowledge of the Absolute. There is only Absolute Knowing.

When Nothing is known Everything is known. (*Bump*)

.

[Age]

This associating the ONE Mind with 'thoughts' is a perfect example of just how the human brain can twist and distort things, by, and into, what it BELIEVES is true. There is a perfectly reasonable explanation of WHY the Mind was/is associated with, and is seen as, thinking/thoughts/the brain, et cetera, but this is long way down the track of UNDERSTANDING, Itself.

Let me ask you the same question about your statement above:
What is written here in the quote could itself be twisted and distorted, correct?

A resounding YES. OF COURSE it could be.

Or is this just NOT possible?

OF COURSE this is POSSIBLE.

Absolutely EVERY thing I write could be WRONG, or partly wrong. (If you ask most people most of what I write is WRONG, twisted and/or distorted).

Are you NOT going to answer any of the nine questions I posed to you, and are you NOT going to respond to any thing else I wrote to you?

[Lacewing]

I'm acknowledging that anything is possible -- but a single path just doesn't seem likely to me.

I have KNOWN this for quite some time now. But what does not SEEM likely to you could in FACT be thee Truth.

What is it, exactly, that you have KNOWN for quite some time now?

Thee Truth, to me, IS there could be but just one single path, (no matter how unlikely this seems to you).

I have NEVER said there is one single path.

now that you ADMIT that there could be ONE SINGLE PATH to get somewhere, then we can finally start MOVE FORWARD, (along that path?).

Why?

Where are we going?

Is there something that you think is needed?

I'm saying the opposite could be true: if anything is possible, then it's also possible that there is NOT a single path.

AND I have ALWAYS AGREED with this. You, however, have ALWAYS ASSUMED, otherwise.

So what are we "moving forward" ON or TOWARD?

Is it a single path that could exist... or a single path that does exist?

why don't you question YOURSELF more?

LOL Does asking a person with a mental disorder why they do NOT question them self more, really seem that sensible and/or sane to you?

Why wouldn't it be?

Would you really like me to say some thing here. Ask a clarifying question, and then answer that question? Would that really be interesting?

I think it would be interesting for you to respond to your own questions and statements. For example, below you say...

It might actually be the ANSWER that I have been searching for.

What ANSWER is that?

The of HOW can I communicate better WHERE I will be FULLY heard, and FULLY UNDERSTOOD.

You could ask yourself:
Is there actually an answer, or is the SEARCH/DESIRE for "the answer" some sort of intoxication?

What does it mean to be fully heard and fully understood, and why is it important?

I have ALSO continually stated that ABSOLUTELY EVERY thing I write could be WRONG.

See below...

ABSOLUTELY EVERY thing I write, unlike yourself, IS OPEN... /

Because you see/think a certain way, based on your OWN ASSUMPTIONS and BELIEFS, so then you SEE that in "others" also... /

If absolutely every thing you write could be wrong, why would you make such statements about me -- and what is your purpose in doing so?

Continually expressing very closed views, like There is NOT a single path, when this is NOT the Truth, instills in and/or influences "others" to have these very harmful and damaging WRONG views as well, and as such is abusive by nature.

Why is it a WRONG view?

how would you know what is "bullshit"?

I think it's typically characterized by imbalance and/or dishonesty.

is it possible that there is an ultimate 'real Truth' for ALL?

Does it matter? Is it necessary to fathom for this human/Earth experience? Would it truly make any necessary difference? Is everything in order as it is -- if not, why do you think it's not?

What appears to be fun and play to you is TRYING TO put "others" down, and/or disregard what they are saying, usually from a misinterpretation you have made, and, what appears to be tedious and boring to you is WHEN you are questioned and challenged in regards to what you say and write.

So, why would you read posts by someone who you think tries to put others down? We all have our ways of challenging the claims and statements that each other make, and that process can be interpreted in many ways.

I'm choosing how far to go into the gyrations that any one person is presenting.

I do NOT know of a human being who does NOT choose to do this.

Then why wouldn't you understand that this is what I'm doing -- rather than accusing me of just "disregarding" what is being said because I don't want to be challenged? For me, the volume of things that you say are not worth wading through. Nit-picking every detail and word with you is not pleasing. I choose the statements that seem the most productive to interact on, and I skip the rest, for the purpose stated above.

I do put effort into communicating with people, as I have just done with you now.

Do you really find it an "effort" in communicating with people?

What are you assuming is meant by effort? I'm simply saying that it is a conscious use of my energy -- making an effort as opposed to doing nothing. It's usually very easy.

[AlexW]

No, it doesn't know itself by being itself. Instead, it's simply itself.

Well, yes - it doesn't do anything so how could it do any knowing.
But Being itself, the quality, you might say, is "of knowing" - of course this is just a word, like "it is" are just words.
It just feels right to describe this being/presence as knowing - not as a knowing of something. Like water cannot be but wet, being cannot be but knowing... the words are interchangeable.

[AlexW]

Absolutely EVERY thing I write could be WRONG, or partly wrong.

Now I could ask you again if you are absolutely sure of the above, but we know where this is going to go (or we don't)...

I might agree though, that anything we say could be wrong/right/partially wrong/partially right or it could be gobbledygook...
The key might be the word "could" - as long as one uses words like might, could or would anything could be said, but maybe nothing is actually said - this could well be how you communicate (or maybe you don't)...
It might not go anywhere, or maybe it does, but maybe this is what you want to say (or maybe not)?
Are you saying that nothing goes anywhere? (on which we might actually agree on, and maybe we don't...)

Are you NOT going to answer any of the nine questions I posed to you

Sure, but maybe not to all of them - but maybe to some, or maybe not.... we'll see, or we might not...

[Age]

I'm acknowledging that anything is possible -- but a single path just doesn't seem likely to me.

I have KNOWN this for quite some time now. But what does not SEEM likely to you could in FACT be thee Truth.

What is it, exactly, that you have KNOWN for quite some time now?

What now does NOT seem likely to you, which is; there could be a single path to get somewhere.

Thee Truth, to me, IS there could be but just one single path, (no matter how unlikely this seems to you).

I have NEVER said there is one single path.

now that you ADMIT that there could be ONE SINGLE PATH to get somewhere, then we can finally start MOVE FORWARD, (along that path?).

Why?

There is NO WHY to what could be done. WHAT there is, however, is NOW a possibility.

Where are we going?

That is up to who you are saying is "we", and, you will only go wherever you WANT to go.

Is there something that you think is needed?

In general NO, EVERY thing is in Its PERFECT position right now. But my answer really depends on WHAT you are referring to exactly.

AND I have ALWAYS AGREED with this. You, however, have ALWAYS ASSUMED, otherwise.

So what are we "moving forward" ON or TOWARD?

Living in PEACE and HARMONY, with one "another", as One. Have you NOT recognize this before?

Is it a single path that could exist... or a single path that does exist?

LOL Does asking a person with a mental disorder why they do NOT question them self more, really seem that sensible and/or sane to you?

Why wouldn't it be?

I NEVER said it would NOT be.

I just asked you a simple, straightforward clarifying question.

Would you really like me to say some thing here. Ask a clarifying question, and then answer that question? Would that really be interesting?

I think it would be interesting for you to respond to your own questions and statements. For example, below you say...

It might actually be the ANSWER that I have been searching for.

What ANSWER is that?

The one which you, yourself, QUOTED below this sentence.

The of HOW can I communicate better WHERE I will be FULLY heard, and FULLY UNDERSTOOD.

You could ask yourself:
Is there actually an answer, or is the SEARCH/DESIRE for "the answer" some sort of intoxication?

I COULD but I already HAVE asked and already KNOW the answer to this subsequent question.

You seem to be under the ASSUMPTION that I have NOT yet questioned My self regarding who the i is and Who I am, exactly, is this correct?

What does it mean to be fully heard and fully understood, and why is it important?

It means that "others" KNOW Who 'I" Truly am. Why this is important is, besides just living, it is the most fundamental part of BEING.

Absolutely EVERY child is born WANTING to be recognized and accepted for 'Who I am'.

I have ALSO continually stated that ABSOLUTELY EVERY thing I write could be WRONG.

See below...

Okay.

ABSOLUTELY EVERY thing I write, unlike yourself, IS OPEN... /

Because you see/think a certain way, based on your OWN ASSUMPTIONS and BELIEFS, so then you SEE that in "others" also... /

If absolutely every thing you write could be wrong, why would you make such statements about me -- and what is your purpose in doing so?

Why would I make such such statements is to SEE if I am WRONG, or not.

The purpose for doing this is so you can CORRECT me, if I am wrong. That way I can KNOW, for sure, who 'you' think you are, and SEE WHERE you are coming from, exactly.

Continually expressing very closed views, like There is NOT a single path, when this is NOT the Truth, instills in and/or influences "others" to have these very harmful and damaging WRONG views as well, and as such is abusive by nature.

Why is it a WRONG view?

Because it is a closed view. If there is a closed view, then there is NOT an OPEN view, and only from an OPEN view can the Truth be SEEN.

I have just noticed I wrote incorrectly in this quote your provided. I wrote; "this is NOT the Truth". This could be much better worded as; 'this may NOT be the Truth'.

how would you know what is "bullshit"?

I think it's typically characterized by imbalance and/or dishonesty.

Imbalance to WHAT exactly?

And OBVIOUSLY "bullshit" is typically characterized by dishonesty. That goes without speaking. But how would you, or do you, know what is "dishonest"?

Also, could what you say is "dishonest" some times NOT actually be dishonest at all?

And, when you see imbalance, and/or dishonesty, is there something that you think is needed? ?

is it possible that there is an ultimate 'real Truth' for ALL?

Does it matter?

To who/what?

Is it necessary to fathom for this human/Earth experience?

If people WANT TO GET what they Truly WANT, then yes, and ultimate 'real Truth' is necessary to fathom.

Would it truly make any necessary difference?

YES.

Is everything in order as it is -- if not, why do you think it's not?

YES. Absolutely EVERY thing is in PERFECT order as it is, right NOW.

Me LEARNING how to express BETTER HOW human beings can live in an abusive and stress free, non-polluting Truly peaceful and harmonious world together as One is in order. So was you PREVIOUSLY insisting that there is NOT a single path to get somewhere was in PERFECT order, and NOW that that view has changed and you do admit that there could be a single path to get somewhere is also in PERFECT order as well.

Absolutely EVERY thing is in perfect order as it is, right NOW, even including you stating that you aware of IMBALANCE and DISHONESTY, in the "world". If it was NOT for this imbalance and dishonesty that you, yourself, see and admit is HERE, right NOW, then there would NOT be anything NEEDED to be changed. SEEING the 'imbalance' and 'dishonesty' and WANTING to bring to light/change these things is EVERY thing in PERFECT order, right NOW.

Only when people are Honest, OPEN, and WANTING to change, for the better, then the "world", itself, can and WILL really change for the better also.

What appears to be fun and play to you is TRYING TO put "others" down, and/or disregard what they are saying, usually from a misinterpretation you have made, and, what appears to be tedious and boring to you is WHEN you are questioned and challenged in regards to what you say and write.

So, why would you read posts by someone who you think tries to put others down?

But I do NOT think you try to do this, BEFORE I read your posts. I only become AWARE of WHEN you do this, WHEN I SEE it, which obviously can ONLY occur AFTER I have read your posts.

What you actually write in your posts I have absolutely NO idea of until AFTER I read them.

We all have our ways of challenging the claims and statements that each other make, and that process can be interpreted in many ways.

Absolutely EVERY thing is relative to the observer. So, obviously, absolutely ANY thing can be interpreted in so many different ways.

I do NOT know of a human being who does NOT choose to do this.

Then why wouldn't you understand that this is what I'm doing --

Did you ASSUME I did NOT understand this?

rather than accusing me of just "disregarding" what is being said because I don't want to be challenged?

Because you CHOOSE how far to go into the "gyrations" of what one person presents does not detract from the FACT that you are just 'disregarding' what one person presents. When you do NOT respond to, or ignore, challenges and/or questions asked, just to CLARIFY what you do and/or are talking about, then just because you call that "choosing how far to go into the gyrations" does NOT get away from the FACT that you were/are just disregarding what I was/am saying, asking, and challenging.

If you IGNORE what "another" presents, by NOT responding, especially regarding questions posed to you, then the FACT IS you are disregarding what they write. You might be 'taking in' what they are saying and so NOT "disregarding" what they write, from that perspective, but if you do NOT reply to what they write, then you are ignoring, and thus disregarding, from that perspective.

For me, the volume of things that you say are not worth wading through.

Obviously, IF a person has NOT yet experienced some thing, then they do NOT know the worth of that thing.

Nit-picking every detail and word with you is not pleasing.

If what I do is NOT pleasing to you, then do NOT do what does NOT please you. But philosophy, to me, is about the love of logical reasoning to become wiser. 'Logical reasoning' entails challenging ALL of what is SEEN to be wrong and/or flawed.

If you want to only SEE and insist that everything is PERFECT the way it is now, but do NOT want to LOOK AT and discuss the finer detail of what is actually happening and WRONG, within that PERFECTION, then that kind of misbehavior IS the WRONG, in and of itself.

The PERFECT order that is NOW, is the WANTING and CHANGING of the WRONG, within that PERFECTION.

But if you are NOT going to read ALL of what I write and only cherry-pick what to respond to, then, besides that is MORE EVIDENCE that you DO disregard what is said/asked because you do NOT want to be challenged, you are only getting a very narrow view of what I am ACTUALLY saying.

I choose the statements that seem the most productive to interact on, and I skip the rest, for the purpose stated above.

I find it a huge coincidence that you CHOOSE to interact on those statements, which are NOT challenging nor questioning your statements, but only interact on those statements, which you see are WRONG and could be "put down".

Do you really find it an "effort" in communicating with people?

What are you assuming is meant by effort? I'm simply saying that it is a conscious use of my energy -- making an effort as opposed to doing nothing. It's usually very easy.

I was NOT assuming any thing. I was asking a clarifying question, which you actually answered openly and honestly for once.

Thank you for responding to one of my clarifying questions. I just wish it would happen far more often. It is after all the only True way that I can Truly understand that individual person.