Titleless 15
- Arising_uk
- Posts: 12314
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am
Re: Analysis of "Eff the Royal We"
Presumably all these 'crimes' and slights against you were just divine retribution, your karmic just desserts?
Re: Analysis of "Eff the Royal We"
Probably.Arising_uk wrote: ↑Wed May 06, 2020 2:38 am Presumably all these 'crimes' and slights against you were just divine retribution, your karmic just desserts?
I've made many pudding movies ....have you tasted any of these yet?
https://www.imdb.com/search/keyword/?ke ... etribution
- Arising_uk
- Posts: 12314
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am
Re: Analysis of "Eff the Royal We"
So you are now admitting than Luxin is your sock-puppet?
Re: Analysis of "Eff the Royal We"
Ask the sock puppet.Arising_uk wrote: ↑Wed May 06, 2020 2:05 pm So you are now admitting than Luxin is your sock-puppet?
- Arising_uk
- Posts: 12314
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am
Re: Analysis of "Eff the Royal We"
I am as it could well be vice versa.
Re: Analysis of "Eff the Royal We"
Meaningless and pointless.
- Arising_uk
- Posts: 12314
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am
Re: Analysis of "Eff the Royal We"
You replied to a question I asked of Luxin. How did you know his karmic desserts if you aren't him?Dontaskme wrote: Meaningless and pointless.
Re: Analysis of "Eff the Royal We"
The proof is in the pudding, via direct experience, it's elementary and experiencial dear watson.Arising_uk wrote: ↑Wed May 06, 2020 5:39 pmYou replied to a question I asked of Luxin. How did you know his karmic desserts if you aren't him?Dontaskme wrote: Meaningless and pointless.
If I know then everyone knows. And when everyone knows, no one knows.
It's all basically meaningless and pointless. There is no knower.
- Arising_uk
- Posts: 12314
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am
Re: Analysis of "Eff the Royal We"
If that is the case Holmes then I deduce that you are Luxin and he or you are each others sock-puppets.Dontaskme wrote: The proof is in the pudding, via direct experience, it's elementary and experiencial dear watson. ...
That may be the case for you but I know what it's like to be a male body and approximately half the population doesn't, so no not everyone knows what I know.If I know then everyone knows. ...
When everyone knows then there is no-one who doesn't.And when everyone knows, no one knows. ...
Yes there is, it's the being of a body with senses, memory and a language in an external world.It's all basically meaningless and pointless. There is no knower.
Re: Analysis of "Eff the Royal We"
There is no knower.
N0 there isn't Dumb0 ..Remember the being of a body with senses,memory and a language in an external world, doesn't know anything. The being of a body with senses, memory and a language in an external world is KNOWN - and that which is KNOWN knows nothing, for any thing known CANNOT be the knower because the knower is not a thing - and that which is not a thing has no knowledge of itself...this is pure meta common knowledge knowing, a knowing the likes of you know nothing about, because there is no you because there is no other than YOUArising_uk wrote: ↑Fri May 08, 2020 2:41 amYes there is, it's the being of a body with senses, memory and a language in an external world.
There is no knower that can be known, for the knower is the known as one undivided knowing in the exact same intantaneous moment this knowing arises... one with itself...the only KNOWING there is.
You cannot know you are the knower - because you ARE knowing. To know you know, you would have to split yourself in two into knower and known.
.
Re: Analysis of "Eff the Royal We"
Arising_uk wrote: ↑Fri May 08, 2020 2:41 am I know what it's like to be a male body and approximately half the population doesn't, so no not everyone knows what I know.
The concept of a male body is KNOWN. The experience of being a male body is KNOWN. No body knows this, no body experiences a conceptual knowing.
In reality, no one or thing has ever seen or is being a male or female body. The concept is an experience no body is having, the concept is just an idea appearing in no body or thing aka the mind. The mind knows itself conceptually, via experience.
Now show me this mind if you've ever seen or experienced one?
The finger that is pointing to the moon cannot know the moon, it can only point to it. Same applies to a dog, if you point out the moon to a dog, all it will do is sniff the finger.
Trust me, there is absolutely no one being YOU...There is no Arising_uk looking out of your eyes...upon an external world.
YOU are the looked upon, you are insideout.
.
Now, back to this conceptual known ( so no not everyone knows what I know)
See if you can Point to the I that knows what it thinks it knows, and also while you're at it, point to the thinker of thought, and maybe the thought itself...then show me the exact location of your findings ?