Reincarnation. Who or what would reincarnate? (explained)

[surreptitious57]

How does this everything that the brain does relate to this the functioning of the mind ?

What exactly is both of these things ?

So do you think there are as many minds as there are human brains doing ?

Absolutely everything without exception that the brain does IS the functioning of the mind
Without the mind the brain cannot do anything and so this is the point when the brain dies

There may be non human minds which we do not know of elsewhere in the Universe
But as far as we are concerned every functioning brain will have a functioning mind

[Age]

How does this everything that the brain does relate to this the functioning of the mind ?

What exactly is both of these things ?

So do you think there are as many minds as there are human brains doing ?

Absolutely everything without exception that the brain does IS the functioning of the mind

And what is this 'mind'thing exactly?

And how does 'it' function exactly?

Without the mind the brain cannot do anything and so this is the point when the brain dies

I do not see the point. If the brain cannot do anything without the "mind", then what had this got to do with when the brain dies?

What happens to the "mind" when the brain dies?

Does the "mind" exist before the brain does?

Does the "mind" die?

There may be non human minds which we do not know of elsewhere in the Universe
But as far as we are concerned every functioning brain will have a functioning mind

And what does this "mind" thing look like exactly?

And who and/or what is this 'we', which you say as far as 'they' are concerned every functioning brain will have a functioning "mind"?

[surreptitious57]

And what is this mind thing exactly ?

And how does it function exactly ?

What happens to the mind when the brain dies ?

Does the mind exist before the brain does ?

Does the mind die ?

And what does this mind thing look like exactly ?

Mind as function of the brain is both conscious / sub conscious
Mind operates at physical / psychological / philosophical levels

The mind does not exist before the brain does for it is of the brain

When the brain dies the mind just ceases to function rather than die too
This is because the mind is not actually organic unlike the brain which is

The mind does not look like anything at all because it is not something that you can see

[Dontaskme]

But Oneness is all inclusive of everything, including the beer bottle. So again explain the experience of being a 'beer bottle'

If it's easy and simply explained in words, then describe in words the experience of what being a 'beer bottle' is like?

But 'who' do 'you' want 'me' to explain the experience of what being a 'beer bottle' is like?

Explain it to me, or to yourself, whatever, just do it. You claimed oneness can be easily and simply explained using words...so explain in words what the experience of being a beer bottle is like?

By the way, the 'beer bottle' does not have the ability to experience like the 'you' and thee 'I' do.

The 'you' and 'I' is a point of reference, it's an appearance, it's an object in consciousness. Objects do NOT experience anything.
The I / you IS the experience OF ONENESS/Consciousness. The experience is an appearance of consciousness.

But if you are claiming that the I or you an object in consciousness is able to experience ..then explain in words the experience of being an object?... you wont have a problem doing this because you continue to claim over and over again how easy it is to explain in words.




.

[Age]

But Oneness is all inclusive of everything, including the beer bottle. So again explain the experience of being a 'beer bottle'

If it's easy and simply explained in words, then describe in words the experience of what being a 'beer bottle' is like?

But 'who' do 'you' want 'me' to explain the experience of what being a 'beer bottle' is like?

Explain it to me, or to yourself, whatever, just do it. You claimed oneness can be easily and simply explained using words...so explain in words what the experience of being a beer bottle is like?

I never said the beer bottle can experience. So, I can not explain in words what the experience of being a beer bottle is like. If you think or believe that a beer bottle can experience, then why?

Yes Oneness can be very easily and very simply explained using words. Have 'you' not experienced Oneness yet?

By the way, the 'beer bottle' does not have the ability to experience like the 'you' and thee 'I' do.

The 'you' and 'I' is a point of reference, it's an appearance, it's an object in consciousness.

This maybe what the 'you' and the 'I' is to 'you', but this is not what the 'you' and the 'I' is, to me.

To me, thee 'I' is Consciousness, whereas the 'you' is what you call a point of reference, an appearance, and an object in 'Me' - thee 'I', Consciousness.

Now, considering you believe that you are right here, and also believe that I am wrong, then 'you' are still a long way from understanding 'ALL-OF-THIS', from my perspective.

Objects do NOT experience anything.

This is correct, in the sense, which you are 'trying to' get across and explain in words. But this is also incorrect, in another sense. The human body is an object, which is obviously able to experience.

The I / you IS the experience OF ONENESS/Consciousness. The experience is an appearance of consciousness.

To me, thee 'I' and the 'you' are NOT the same thing. The 'you' it could be said is the experience of ONENESS/Consciousness, but, to me, thee ONENESS/Consciousness is 'I'.

But if you are claiming that the I or you an object in consciousness is able to experience ..

Well I am not claiming thee 'I' is an object of Consciousness, nor am I claiming the 'you' is able to experience, so the rest of what you wrote was completely unnecessary. As I have suggested many times previously if 'you', people, clarified what 'I' or "others" are saying instead of assuming and jumping to conclusions, then 'you' would not be so wrong, so often.

then explain in words the experience of being an object?... you wont have a problem doing this because you continue to claim over and over again how easy it is to explain in words.


.

LOL I have NEVER once claimed the absurd and ridiculous thing you are claiming here. Although, when 'you' learn how to answer the question Who am 'I'?' properly and correctly, and so come to understand fully who and what 'I' Truly am, then 'you' will be able to understand in words the experience of being an object. That object just being thee Universe, Itself.

But as I say while you continue to have and maintain the beliefs that 'you' do, then you are still a long way off from learning and discovering ALL-OF-THIS.

[Age]

And what is this mind thing exactly ?

And how does it function exactly ?

What happens to the mind when the brain dies ?

Does the mind exist before the brain does ?

Does the mind die ?

And what does this mind thing look like exactly ?

Mind as function of the brain is both conscious / sub conscious
Mind operates at physical / psychological / philosophical levels

This does not explain how the "mind" functions.

The mind does not exist before the brain does for it is of the brain

Now saying the mind is of the brain appears to somewhat contradict when you previously said; Without the mind the brain cannot do anything.

When the brain dies the mind just ceases to function rather than die too

When something is said "to function", then usually some sort of explanation can be given of how it actually functions. You do not yet seem able to provide this explanation.

This is because the mind is not actually organic unlike the brain which is

So, if the mind is not actually organic, then what is the mind actually?

The mind does not look like anything at all because it is not something that you can see

So, to you, you can not see the mind. The mind is not organic. But the mind operates at physical levels, as well as at psychological and philosophical levels. The mind ceases when the brain dies. The brain can not do anything without the mind. But the mind is of the brain. And, the mind as a function of the brain is both conscious and subconscious, correct?

[surreptitious57]

So to you you can not see the mind . The mind is not organic . But the mind operates at physical levels as well as at psychological and philosophical levels . The mind ceases when the brain dies . The brain can not do anything without the mind . But the mind is of the brain . And the mind as a function of the brain is both conscious and subconscious correct ?

I dont think the mind can operate at a physical level if it cannot be seen as that is obviously contradictory
I dont think the mind experiences conciousness rather the person whose mind it is does
The other statements I hold to be true at this point in time and so I will let them stand

[Dontaskme]

Explain it to me, or to yourself, whatever, just do it. You claimed oneness can be easily and simply explained using words...so explain in words what the experience of being a beer bottle is like?

I never said the beer bottle can experience. So, I can not explain in words what the experience of being a beer bottle is like. If you think or believe that a beer bottle can experience, then why?

I never said a beer bottle can experience. I said explain in words the experience of being a beer bottle?
You have already claimed here that the body is able to experience...

The human body is an object, which is obviously able to experience.

You've claimed the body is an object able to experience, so if that is true then the body is able to explain in words what the experience of being a body is like, and if that can be explained then so can the experience of being a beer bottle be explained because that is an object too, that you claim is able to experience.

Yes Oneness can be very easily and very simply explained using words. Have 'you' not experienced Oneness yet?

No, oneness cannot be explained in words. There is no 'you' to HAVE an experience of oneness. THE 'you' IS the experience of oneness, 'you' is a thought, a temporal appearance of oneness, a thought known is a duality that comes and goes, and not what oneness actually is because oneness is nondual.

By the way, the 'beer bottle' does not have the ability to experience like the 'you' and thee 'I' do.

The 'you' and 'I' is a point of reference, it's an appearance, it's an object in consciousness.

This maybe what the 'you' and the 'I' is to 'you', but this is not what the 'you' and the 'I' is, to me.

I don't care.

To me, thee 'I' is Consciousness, whereas the 'you' is what you call a point of reference, an appearance, and an object in 'Me' - thee 'I', Consciousness.

I is a thought in consciousness. Consciousness absent of thought is the only real consciousness ... in the same context there is no thought mechanism in a flower that says to itself I AM a flower...a flower is just pure knowing consciousness.

Now, considering you believe that you are right here, and also believe that I am wrong, then 'you' are still a long way from understanding 'ALL-OF-THIS', from my perspective.

I already understand all of this and realise the non-conceptual reality of the nondual consciousness.


I just don't agree with your version, but that does not mean I am right and you are wrong, you can believe whatever you like, it's your prerogative. You ASSUME that I have beliefs, and then claim you do not have them. Isn't that strange? how on earth do you know that I have beliefs except in your own ASSUMED belief that you then claim TO NOT have. Hmm, very confusing isn't it?

As for this one here, I don't need you to ASSUME I am a long way off understanding what only I here can understand. In fact you have no idea what I know and understand except what you BELIEVE from your OWN point of view.

Objects do NOT experience anything.

This is correct, in the sense, which you are 'trying to' get across and explain in words. But this is also incorrect, in another sense. The human body is an object, which is obviously able to experience.

This is incorrect. Bodies do not experience anything.

The I / you IS the experience OF ONENESS/Consciousness. The experience is an appearance of consciousness.

To me, thee 'I' and the 'you' are NOT the same thing. The 'you' it could be said is the experience of ONENESS/Consciousness, but, to me, thee ONENESS/Consciousness is 'I'.

I don't agree. Consciousness is not anything, things are appearances of nothing, not a thing.

But if you are claiming that the I or you an object in consciousness is able to experience ..

As I have suggested many times previously if 'you', people, clarified what 'I' or "others" are saying instead of assuming and jumping to conclusions, then 'you' would not be so wrong, so often.

It is not necessary to keep asking for clarifications and assume rights and wrongs when all this is already understood and realised quite easily and simply without the fog of words or the unnecessary incessant need to explain this.

then explain in words the experience of being an object?... you wont have a problem doing this because you continue to claim over and over again how easy it is to explain in words.

Although, when 'you' learn how to answer the question Who am 'I'?' properly and correctly, and so come to understand fully who and what 'I' Truly am, then 'you' will be able to understand in words the experience of being an object. That object just being thee Universe, Itself.

But as I say while you continue to have and maintain the beliefs that 'you' do, then you are still a long way off from learning and discovering ALL-OF-THIS.

All this is already understood and realised by me quite easily and simply without the fog of words or the unnecessary incessant need to explain this. So there is no need for you to preach to the already converted.

Bye the way ... TO learn how to answer the question Who am 'I'?' HAS BEEN ANSWERED, BY ME, MANY TIMES. But it seems you keep forgetting this has been stated over and over again, but it is as if you don't want to believe IT....perhaps that's because you keep saying you do not have any beliefs....so be it. Now what?


.

[Age]

So to you you can not see the mind . The mind is not organic . But the mind operates at physical levels as well as at psychological and philosophical levels . The mind ceases when the brain dies . The brain can not do anything without the mind . But the mind is of the brain . And the mind as a function of the brain is both conscious and subconscious correct ?

I dont think the mind can operate at a physical level if it cannot be seen as that is obviously contradictory
I dont think the mind experiences conciousness rather the person whose mind it is does
The other statements I hold to be true at this point in time and so I will let them stand

I was just going on what you wrote.

Do you still let stand the brain can not do anything without the mind but the mind is of the brain? If yes, then are you able to explain how this actually works?

Also, why is it supposedly obviously contradictory for something that can not be seen to operate at the physical level?

[Age]

Explain it to me, or to yourself, whatever, just do it. You claimed oneness can be easily and simply explained using words...so explain in words what the experience of being a beer bottle is like?

I never said the beer bottle can experience. So, I can not explain in words what the experience of being a beer bottle is like. If you think or believe that a beer bottle can experience, then why?

I never said a beer bottle can experience. I said explain in words the experience of being a beer bottle?
You have already claimed here that the body is able to experience...

Of course the human body can experience. Do you dispute this?

As I said I never said a beer bottle can experience. A beer bottle can not experience. So, if something is unable to experience, then it is not possible to explain in words the experience of something that is not able to experience.

The human body is an object, which is obviously able to experience.

You've claimed the body is an object able to experience, so if that is true then the body is able to explain in words what the experience of being a body is like, and if that can be explained then so can the experience of being a beer bottle be explained because that is an object too, that you claim is able to experience.

Are you blind or do you just miss some words on purpose. I wrote; The HUMAN body.

You appear to really enjoy twisting and distorting what is said, in words, to fit in with and suit your own already held beliefs and assumptions.

Yes Oneness can be very easily and very simply explained using words. Have 'you' not experienced Oneness yet?

No, oneness cannot be explained in words. There is no 'you' to HAVE an experience of oneness. THE 'you' IS the experience of oneness, 'you' is a thought, a temporal appearance of oneness, a thought known is a duality that comes and goes, and not what oneness actually is because oneness is nondual.

LOL that is what I have been saying. But 'you' have been absolutely incapable of seeing and understanding this. This is because 'you' look at and see things from that 'thinking' perspective.

Even now the thinking in that body still believes that it knows what is absolutely true, right, and correct.

By the way, the 'beer bottle' does not have the ability to experience like the 'you' and thee 'I' do.

The 'you' and 'I' is a point of reference, it's an appearance, it's an object in consciousness.

This maybe what the 'you' and the 'I' is to 'you', but this is not what the 'you' and the 'I' is, to me.

I don't care.

Fair enough.

But do not expect "other" 'yous' to care what that 'you' thinks and believes is true. Obviously that 'you' is not expressing the one and only actual Truth of things here.

To me, thee 'I' is Consciousness, whereas the 'you' is what you call a point of reference, an appearance, and an object in 'Me' - thee 'I', Consciousness.

I is a thought in consciousness.

Just as I said, This maybe what the 'you' and the 'I' is to 'you', but this is not what the 'you' and the 'I' is, to me.

What can be obviously seen here is 'you' only look at and see things from the already held thinking and believing within that body, and so 'you' are not even able to look at, let alone see, what the actual Truth of things are.

If 'I' is a thought in consciousness, to 'you', then that is great. Keep thinking or believing this is true.

'you' are free to think and believe absolutely anything you to choose to.

Consciousness absent of thought is the only real consciousness ... in the same context there is no thought mechanism in a flower that says to itself I AM a flower...a flower is just pure knowing consciousness.

A flower does not have a brain, so if there is thought mechanism in a flower, then that would be amazing.

By the way, and you still have not been able to comprehend this, to me, 'I' am Consciousness, which is absent of thought. 'I' am not the 'thinking', 'I' am the KNOWING One. 'you' are the thinking one. But I do not expect 'you' to be able to understand and grasp this, just yet. Especially with all of those beliefs that you are desperate to hang onto and maintain.

Now, considering you believe that you are right here, and also believe that I am wrong, then 'you' are still a long way from understanding 'ALL-OF-THIS', from my perspective.

I already understand all of this and realise the non-conceptual reality of the nondual consciousness.

From my perspective, you appear to not yet fully understand ALL-OF-THIS, and you appear to not yet fully realize the non-conceptual reality of the nondual Consciousness.

I just don't agree with your version, but that does not mean I am right and you are wrong, you can believe whatever you like, it's your prerogative.

Are you assuming I believe some thing here?

And as long as you truly understand that thee 'I' just looks at and sees things differently than the 'you' does, then that is all 'I' want KNOWN and UNDERSTOOD here.

You ASSUME that I have beliefs, and then claim you do not have them. Isn't that strange?

What I find stranger is you tell me; "you can believe whatever you like", even though you are completely aware that I have clearly told you that I do not believe anything.

Also, why is it strange for you that someone assumes something about "another" just having some thing, but then just makes it clear that they do not have the same thing? Someone could assume, for example, that you have a motor vehicle, and then just say but I do not have a motor vehicle. That does not seem that strange at all to me.

how on earth do you know that I have beliefs

By the way you write and say things.

This can be very clearly seen in the way you express.

except in your own ASSUMED belief that you then claim TO NOT have. Hmm, very confusing isn't it?

This is NOT confusing at all. Either you have beliefs or you do not. So, which one is it.

Do you have beliefs?

Once you answer this clarifying question OPENLY and Honestly, then we will KNOW what the actual truth is.

As for this one here, I don't need you to ASSUME I am a long way off understanding what only I here can understand. In fact you have no idea what I know and understand except what you BELIEVE from your OWN point of view.

Once again the 'you' makes the claim that thee 'I' is believing some thing here. So, now what is 'it' exactly that the 'you' thinks or believes thee 'I' is believing here.

I KNOW exactly what 'you' say you know and understand. This can be proven without doubt.

Objects do NOT experience anything.

This is correct, in the sense, which you are 'trying to' get across and explain in words. But this is also incorrect, in another sense. The human body is an object, which is obviously able to experience.

This is incorrect. Bodies do not experience anything. [/object]

To you, human bodies do not have the five senses of seeing, hearing, feeling, tasting, smelling, as well as having a brain, which is how the human body experiences the environment around it, and is also able to express, in words, these experiences. is this correct to 'you'?

The I / you IS the experience OF ONENESS/Consciousness. The experience is an appearance of consciousness.

To me, thee 'I' and the 'you' are NOT the same thing. The 'you' it could be said is the experience of ONENESS/Consciousness, but, to me, thee ONENESS/Consciousness is 'I'.

I don't agree. Consciousness is not anything, things are appearances of nothing, not a thing.

I KNOW you do not agree.

And, I also KNOW to you Consciousness is not a thing. This is how 'you' express in words what you say can not be expressed in words.

By the way thee 'I' does not yet want the 'you' to agree. 'you' not agreeing is providing more evidence of just how the human brain works against the Mind because of the belief-system. The more evidence and proof 'you' provide here, the more the future human beings will be able to comprehend and understand, through words, what I have been saying and pointing out here.

But if you are claiming that the I or you an object in consciousness is able to experience ..

As I have suggested many times previously if 'you', people, clarified what 'I' or "others" are saying instead of assuming and jumping to conclusions, then 'you' would not be so wrong, so often.

It is not necessary to keep asking for clarifications and assume rights and wrongs when all this is already understood and realised quite easily and simply without the fog of words or the unnecessary incessant need to explain this.

So, if the 'you' already understands and realizes quite easily and simply, then what is it exactly that the 'you' is incessantly trying to explain here? (Other than ALL-OF-THIS can not be explained in words?)

By the way thee 'I' keeps asking the 'you' to keep asking for clarification because the 'you' keeps misinterpretation and assuming the wrong things here.

then explain in words the experience of being an object?... you wont have a problem doing this because you continue to claim over and over again how easy it is to explain in words.

Although, when 'you' learn how to answer the question Who am 'I'?' properly and correctly, and so come to understand fully who and what 'I' Truly am, then 'you' will be able to understand in words the experience of being an object. That object just being thee Universe, Itself.

But as I say while you continue to have and maintain the beliefs that 'you' do, then you are still a long way off from learning and discovering ALL-OF-THIS.

All this is already understood and realised by me quite easily and simply without the fog of words or the unnecessary incessant need to explain this. So there is no need for you to preach to the already converted.

What is thee 'I' supposedly preaching to the 'you'?

Let 'us' see if the 'you' can back up and support its claims here.

Bye the way ... TO learn how to answer the question Who am 'I'?' HAS BEEN ANSWERED, BY ME, MANY TIMES. But it seems you keep forgetting this has been stated over and over again, but it is as if you don't want to believe IT....perhaps that's because you keep saying you do not have any beliefs....so be it. Now what?


.

So, what is the answer to the question, 'Who am 'I'?'

Let 'us' see if you can back up and support the claim the 'you' made here now?

[surreptitious57]

Do you still let stand the brain can not do anything without the mind but the mind is of the brain ?
If yes then are you able to explain how this actually works ?

Mind is the function of the brain so without it the brain is just matter and nothing else
So when the brain dies then the mind ceases to function and therefore no longer exists

[Age]

Do you still let stand the brain can not do anything without the mind but the mind is of the brain ?
If yes then are you able to explain how this actually works ?

Mind is the function of the brain so without it the brain is just matter and nothing else
So when the brain dies then the mind ceases to function and therefore no longer exists

So, what creates this mind?

[surreptitious57]

So what creates this mind ?

Mind is an emergent property of the brain but I would not say that the brain creates mind
To create something is not the same as to emerge from something like what happens here

[Dontaskme]

Are you blind or do you just miss some words on purpose. I wrote; The HUMAN body.

You appear to really enjoy twisting and distorting what is said, in words, to fit in with and suit your own already held beliefs and assumptions.

I know you wrote the human body. But I just wanted to shorten it to (body) ..is that a crime now? ..surely you must have known I was refering to a human body and not any other body. Or did you assume something else?

You TOO appear to really enjoy twisting and distorting what is said, in words, to fit in with and suit your own already held beliefs and assumptions...you know, YOUR beliefs that you say you don't have ..but then find no problem projecting the belief that other people must HAVE beliefs, which is quite hysterical ..I mean who is this OTHER ONE who is assumed to have beliefs by you, that you yourself do not believe you HAVE? ..can you see how words just divide and create a duality of you verses the other?

As a side note, whats with all the pedantics, can't you just simply KNOW what's being spoken about here, after all, you are thee (ALL KNOWING ONE...is that right? or is it that you just really enjoy arguing with yourself all the time, pretending that there are others who dont know what they are talking about and that they have lots more to learn on this subject and until they are able to put this into words they will NEVER UNDERSTAND what they are saying.

Is this how you entertain yourself, I guess it MUST be so alonely being THEE ALL KNOWING ONE. . that you have to make up another ONE just so you can justify your need to explain yourself, I mean why would you need to explain yourself to yourself? if you already KNOW

That's what I don't understand....but as for the subject of ONENESS, I perfectly understand, and have no need to put that understanding into words, for it is KNOWN.

But hey ho, do carry on with the game of human charades with yourself, dividing what cannot be divided through words, and is why words will never touch what is actually being talked about here.

.

[Dontaskme]

And, I also KNOW to you Consciousness is not a thing. This is how 'you' express in words what you say can not be expressed in words.

The whole point being made here is that CONSCIOUSNESS....does NOT NEED to be expressed in words to be able to understand it.

I'm not actually explaining CONSCIOUSNESS per-se...I'm discussing the appearances of consciousness, not ACTUAL consciousness itself which is Nondual and cannot be touched using words without turning Nonduality into duality.

Why can't you just ACCEPT this ?

I'm finished with the merry go round that is the world according to AGE..the groove is just so well worn now it's boring me to death.

Goodbye.

.