Dontaskme wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 6:52 am
Age wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 1:33 am
OF COURSE 'this' is VERY GOOD to 'you', "dontaskme", 'you', like "eodnhoj7", BOTH BELIEVE that 'everything' IS 'nothing' AND 'nothing' IS 'everything', and will say just about ANY 'thing' to back up and support this ALREADY STRONGLY HELD ONTO BELIEF of 'yours'
I can't speak for 'eod' but I'm assuming the posts are of a nondual context, so I'm inclined to undertstand them as presented in that context..
And yes, it is my belief, that reality is nondual, and that it is the fundamental underpinning of what constitutes all of reality.
OBVIOUSLY ALL IS One, or 'nondual' if you like.
There is absolutely NOTHING that could REFUTE 'this'.
Thee, or thy, One IS ALL-THERE-IS. BUT, this does NOT mean that the conceptually made up word 'nothing' NOR 'everything' and the definitions for those TWO words IS the EXACT SAME. That is; the conceptual made up, DIFFERENT, DEFINITIONS for those TWO DIFFERENT words MEAN that those ARE DEFINED AS TWO DIFFERENT, or SEPARATE, 'things', which OBVIOUSLY EXIST in 'thought' or 'concept' ONLY.
BUT it IS THROUGH these CONCEPTS or THOUGHTS how 'you', human beings, come to EVOLVE TO ONE DAY COMPREHENDING and UNDERSTANDING, FULLY, ALL-THERE-IS.
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 6:52 am
Age wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 1:33 amSo, IF the 'self' ONLY exists as a 'mentally constructed illusion', (which I have NEVER NOT disagreed with by the way), then WHO or WHAT IS 'mentally constructing this illusion' "dontaskme"?
Consciousness is.
GREAT. So, here we HAVE the 'one' here known as "dontaskme" providing a THIRD DIFFERENT NAME for what "dontaskme" ALSO CLAIMS IS 'unnameable'.
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 1:21 pm
Mind is the only frame of reference.
Age wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 1:33 amYET NOT a one of 'you', posters, here have an ABSOLUTE CLUE nor IDEA as to what the 'Mind' IS, EXACTLY.
No one knows what consciousness is. . in which ''thought'' is but an appearance. [/quote]
LOL If this is what you BELIEVE is true, then this IMPLIES that 'you' KNOW EVERY 'thing'.
How do 'you', supposedly, KNOW that there is NOT 'one thing' that KNOWS what 'consciousness' is?
Are 'you' here 'TRYING TO' imply that the 'KNOWER' or 'CONSCIOUSNESS', Itself, does NOT KNOW what just 'consciousness' is?
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 6:52 am
However, it seems this mind
WHAT 'mind'?
The 'one' that is sometimes SAID and CLAIMED that 'you', human beings, HAVE and/or POSSESS?
The 'one' that is sometimes SAID and CLAIMED that 'you', "dontaskme", HAS and/or POSSESS?
Or, some OTHER 'mind', like some 'Universal mind', or 'the mind of a goat', for example?
WHEN 'you' SAY 'this mind', then WHAT 'mind' are 'you' REFERRING TO, EXACTLY?
And, what IS 'that mind', EXACTLY?
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 6:52 am
is the only frame of reference, which can relate only to itself, as a self sustaining, self perpetuating, automatic feedback loop, that apparently works very well creating a real sense of identity and autonomy, apparently.
GREAT. So, WHEN you SAY and CLAIM 'this mind' can relate ONLY to 'itself', could you be providing a FOURTH NAME here to 'that', which CLAIM is 'unnameable'?
If yes, then you have ALREADY NAME the so-called and alleged 'unnameable' with the NAMES:
'unnameable'
'knower'
'consciousness', and now maybe
'mind' or 'this mind'.
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 6:52 am
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 1:21 pm
Mind can only refer to itself. There is no other self.
Age wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 1:33 amBUT, 'you' just through TELLING 'us' that there IS NOT ACTUAL 'self'.
Self is a belief,
So, IS 'There is NO self' A BELIEF, and A BELIEF of 'yours', 'the self' known here as "dontaskme".
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 6:52 am
it's a thought, arising in awareness, it's awareness aware of awareness.
Could this 'awareness' word here that refers to a 'thing', which is purported to be aware of awareness' be the FIFTH NAME that you have PROVIDED here for 'that', which you CLAIM is 'unnameable'?
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 6:52 am
It's an apparent illusion.
WHO and/or WHAT is 'self' an apparent illusion TO, EXACTLY?
OBVIOUSLY, it could NOT be to 'you', BECAUSE 'you' are 'the self' here known as "dontaskme".
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 6:52 am
Age wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 1:33 amSo, what is 'it' going to be here? Is there A 'self' and NOT 'other' 'self', OR, does 'the self' exist ONLY as a 'mentally constructed illusion', "dontaskme".
The 'self' exists as a known conceptual character, as in a nightly dream.
TO WHO and/or WHAT, EXACTLY?
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 6:52 am
Ask yourself, does the 'character' appearing in a nightly dream exist Age? ..and there's your answer.
PLEASE do NOT TELL me to 'Ask "myself" ANY 'thing' here.
I KNOW FULLY, ABSOLUTELY, and IRREFUTABLY what 'you' are SO DESPERATELY 'TRYING TO' talk ABOUT and refer TO, EXACTLY.
I even KNOW the EXACT WORDS that can EXPLAIN ALL-OF-THIS in a COMPLETELY and UTTERLY IRREFUTABLE WAY. Can you COMPREHEND the CONSEQUENCES of 'this'?
Also, and by the way, just SAYING and CLAIMING, 'The 'self' exists as a known conceptual character, as in a nightly dream, AND THEN proceeding to TELL "ANOTHER" 'self' to, Ask "your" 'self', (which IS ABSOLUTE ABSURDITY AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL POSSIBLE itself), does the 'character' appearing in a nightly dream exist?
What 'you', "dontaskme", which CLAIMS that is A 'self', and MORE STUPIDLY CLAIMS that 'it' IS 'its' OWN 'self', can 'WIN' 'an argument' and/or HAVE 'your' BELIEFS ACCEPTED and AGREED UPON WHEN 'you' ASK TOTALLY STUPID 'things' as 'you' ARE DOING here.
When 'self' is talked ABOUT BY 'you', human beings, it is IN RELATION TO the 'thoughts' IN THE 'waking state', and NOT TO 'nightly dreams'. WHICH ARE OBVIOUSLY TWO VERY DIFFERENT 'things'.
So, WHAT HAPPENS in 'nightly dreams' does NOT necessarily REFLECT on WHAT HAPPENS in 'waking thought'.
Although there is NO ACTUAL 'self', in the sense that 'you', human beings, go on about, CONTINUOUSLY, but to PROVE 'this' IRREFUTABLY True "dontaskme" 'you' are going to HAVE TO DO a LOT better than 'you' are here.
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 6:52 am
Age wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 1:33 am'you' OBVIOUSLY can NOT have 'this' BOTH WAYS and be right AND correct.
Self and No Self are the same One Self.
So, THERE IS A Self, correct?
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 6:52 am
So yes, both have to exist at the exact same time to be known conceptually in the mind of 'thought'.
1. 'The 'mind of thought' is a Truly IDIOTIC and ILLOGICAL term. It is just some 'thing' 'you' have made up, SAID, and CLAIMED here under the PRESUMPTION that 'it' actually means SOME 'thing'.
2. How could ANY of NO 'thing', which obviously, includes, NO 'Self, EXIST?
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 6:52 am
The concept 'both' and 'neither' means a thing and it's opposite are not contradictions, but rather superpositions.
To 'you' MAYBE, but NOT to 'us'.
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 6:52 am
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 1:21 pm
You are consciousness/unconscious binary. Meaning, You are and you are not, both, and yet neither.
Age wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 1:33 amREALLY?
And 'you' are BOTH and YET NEITHER who and/or what, EXACTLY?
Yes, really.
So, ONCE AGAIN, 'you' are COMPLETELY and UTTERLY UNKNOWING of what 'you' are ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT here.
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 6:52 am
Who and what?..insert a concept.
Which you could NOT do here.
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 6:52 am
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sun May 07, 2023 1:21 pm
"Behind what is named, there is the unnameable."
Age wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 1:33 amBUT 'It' has ALREADY BEEN NAMED.
'you', the 'human being self' known here as "dontaskme", have just NOT YET COME-TO-RECOGNIZE 'this' Fact.
And, this IS BECAUSE thee One, 'behind what is named', has NOT YET INFORMED 'you', human beings here, YET.
See, this One just WAITS, patiently, for 'you', human beings, to COME-TO-LEARN and UNDERSTAND these sort of 'things' FOR and BY "your" 'selves'.
Naming the unnameable is like identifying yourself as an image of the imageless.
It is absolutely NOTHING like 'it'.
CLAIMING that 'you' KNOW of SOME 'thing', which is, supposedly, 'unnameable', is just CONTRADICTORY and ABSURD in the EXTREME.
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 6:52 am
There is no image of you except as a character in a dream..or in a photograph.
REALLY?
Dontaskme wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 6:52 am
Notice you have no image of yourself, you cannot see who or what is seeing you.
I have ALREADY EXPLAINED here to 'you' HOW this IS False, and HOW to LOOK AT and SEE ALL 'things' here.