Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2016 22:11:43 GMT -5
Your still not seeing that you can't possibly know that another can verify their own existence without knowing that they can . If you can't know if they exist or not you can't know that they can know of their own existence .. What you say is consistent with gopal's position. Yeah. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2016 22:13:27 GMT -5
Conversation is getting deviation now. I don't want to know whether they can know or not. All my point is, I can't know whether other individual appear in my consciousness is real like me. First sentence, bingo. See tenka? You cannot prove gopal wrong. A person proves me wrong has not born yet, will never born future. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2016 22:14:24 GMT -5
Yes, they can know in the same way I can know but I can't know whether they exist. The whole point is that. The whole point is Gopal is SEALED inside his own consciousness (which is One consciousness). He only knows his own consciousness. So he cannot know what's in another's consciousness. Everything else derives from that. (The present point veing argued). Yes. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2016 22:17:52 GMT -5
Good morning Gopal. Clear skys here in Aborigineland, enough to make the witchitees contract their rolls of fat and bury deeper into logs, pokemons inviting tourists into their interiors, a grub in Mind. Good morning Alfio. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2016 22:19:45 GMT -5
Ruby is the scripting language(computer language like Java). I work here as a Ruby Coder. Nah, it's just a figment  Could be! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2016 22:24:35 GMT -5
Nah, it's just a figment Could be! How do you find the time to code and post here? That means you have to debug both your code and your posts to STF. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2016 22:40:53 GMT -5
Every thought arises in you. Split mind thought is a thought. There is only the current thought. It's interesting how some accuse you of being repetitive rather than acknowledging the significance of knowing there is only THIS. It's the doorway to Self that peeps are continually being dragged away from by Mr Mind. I don't mind, it's all good, it's all consciousness anyway. Kinda sad though to see the attention fixated on the limited consciousness when unlimited consciousness is a hairs breath away.  |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Jul 17, 2016 22:52:40 GMT -5
The sun is a better example. It takes eight minutes for photons from the sun to reach the earth. If we say the sun isn't there unless someone perceives it, you have to take into consideration the eight minutes. Alternatively, if you look up and, suddenly, there is no sun in the sky, it means the sun disappeared eight minutes ago, not this moment. But distant stars are an even better example. You are seeing light from millions of years ago. For many stars you presently see, they actually are no longer there, they died centuries ago. Time and space don't exist until you experience them. Same as sun and moon. Yes. Stated a different way, time, space, sun, and moon don't exist until they are imagined. If the mind is silent, the eyes only see the actual--the physical world as a unified field of being. The eyes do not distinguish separate things; the intellect, alone, is what distinguishes separate things by abstracting boundaries and thereby imagining a world of form and void. Time and space are like lines of latitude and longitude--imaginary grids cognitively projected and imposed upon the physical world for purposes of measurement and calculation. Initially, the intellect imagines thingness (form and void). Then, it imagines symbols (words or numbers) which can represent physical things. Later, it imagines relationships and qualities exhibited by things and then symbols for representing those relationships and qualities. Eventually, the intellect creates a vast imaginary simulation of reality--a meta-reality--, and as they grow from childhood to adulthood, humans gradually interact with their mental simulation of reality far more than the physical world. This is what we mean when we say that an adult "lives in his or her head." The average adult, therefore, lives in a kind of surreal trancestate in which the mental meta-reality projected by the intellect influences his or her actions as much, or more, than whatever is happening in the physical world. Tolle and other sages advise people to shift attention away from the meta-reality, and the mindtalk that is part of the meta-reality, to the actuality of whatever is physically happening. This is a shift away from imagining to direct sensory perception and pure being. Selfhood is probably the most powerful product of imagination, and it is only when attention is shifted away from imagination for a sustained period of time that this imaginary projection can be seen for the illusion that it is. The pathless path is a journey away from living in an imaginary meta-reality to being Reality, Itself. It is a journey out of the head to a non-intellectually-oriented way of life. It is being here now as a present moment movement of the entire cosmos. THIS is IT, and we are THIS, and there is nothing other than THIS. Fortunately, THIS can be realized. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jul 17, 2016 22:53:14 GMT -5
The question was proving self-evidence, and the question is an absurdity. Now you're trying to prove the self-evidence of the other, and there's no way to do that conceptually. Solipsism is rock solid that way. Doooooofus Guy violence won't work either. The experience that suggests the truth the most forcefully is making genuine eye contact in which you lose yourself.Yes, unless he meets another in his daily life that is awake to themselves as Consciousness, he will only be seeing other people that act as though they are 'predetermined'. If he does meet an other that can truly show him that he is them, then the figment idea has a chance to collapse and re-write itself from that moment. All these ciggy men keep bludgeoning him with logical arguments as to why he's wrong but it was an idea similar to this simple notion that flipped his wolf switch this past early spring.  Isn't it possible for two peeps, neither of which who are really awake to themselves as Consciousness, to lose one another together? |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jul 17, 2016 22:55:56 GMT -5
We includes the Other. How fcuked in the head do we have to become before letting-up this Non-sense and return to our Commonsense? Exactly. I don't know why some here let Gopal annoy them. We all have our own little pet theories that we are convinced are true. We are all "Gopals", we just haven't figured that out yet. Well no, not everyone here is attached to some theory. It's possible to be conscious of the absence of any such pattern. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jul 17, 2016 22:59:56 GMT -5
Sure, I'll take a crack at translating. You seem to have written something along the lines of: "You are lecturing from ego. Maybe if you did that in a thread dedicated to lecturing the ignorant from ego, they would be able to discern that you were trying to lecture them from ego. Once they figured that out, they'd be that much less ignorant." I'm sure you were " speaking from the heart", right?  Not at all... from the mouth. Then you have an opportunity to learn from your own words. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jul 17, 2016 23:02:38 GMT -5
Yes exactly. I was about to define the enigmatic split mind but I couldn't have put it better than you have. Serially? He's talking nonsense. It's a new international soccer team: "Hyperminding Hamsters United" ... |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jul 17, 2016 23:07:12 GMT -5
Well, either some peeps are straight or not, and if not that's fine, it's a take I disagree with but can respect. If, on the other hand, one peep is crooked and the other one ain't, there's no bein' yer bro's keeper and all that ... It's a large if. If the intention is straightness, and what appears is crookedness, and there are at least two interacting, it's very unlikely that all of the blame for crookedness is due to one interactee. The only way sure way for the hypothetical straight peep to stay straight in everyone's eyes is to not engage. Next best is to stay straight in the engagement, but that demands crooked peep to walk the line. So it's very similar to not engaging, because the engagement is very limited. Sure, if straight man takes a roundabout on crooked dude's turf then he's not gonna' look so straight anymore. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jul 17, 2016 23:08:39 GMT -5
The knowledge in question isn't information and can't be conveyed directly, but the questioning doesn't end just because it's finally understood to be futile. That point of futility is only a starting point. It's only when things begin to get interesting. Perhaps so. But there are different contexts to how the question is answered. Well no, there's only one context in which there is knowledge associated with the end of the questioning. The question not only has no answer in the personal context, but the questioning either never ends or has to be ignored and/or actively suppressed. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jul 17, 2016 23:12:50 GMT -5
Time and space don't exist until you experience them. Same as sun and moon. Yes. Stated a different way, time, space, sun, and moon don't exist until they are imagined. If the mind is silent, the eyes only see the actual--the physical world as a unified field of being. The eyes do not distinguish separate things; the intellect, alone, is what distinguishes separate things by abstracting boundaries and thereby imagining a world of form and void. Time and space are like lines of latitude and longitude--imaginary grids cognitively projected and imposed upon the physical world for purposes of measurement and calculation. Initially, the intellect imagines thingness (form and void). Then, it imagines symbols (words or numbers) which can represent physical things. Later, it imagines relationships and qualities exhibited by things and then symbols for representing those relationships and qualities. Eventually, the intellect creates a vast imaginary simulation of reality--a meta-reality--, and as they grow from childhood to adulthood, humans gradually interact with their mental simulation of reality far more than the physical world. This is what we mean when we say that an adult "lives in his or her head." The average adult, therefore, lives in a kind of surreal trancestate in which the mental meta-reality projected by the intellect influences his or her actions as much, or more, than whatever is happening in the physical world. Tolle and other sages advise people to shift attention away from the meta-reality, and the mindtalk that is part of the meta-reality, to the actuality of whatever is physically happening. This is a shift away from imagining to direct sensory perception and pure being. Selfhood is probably the most powerful product of imagination, and it is only when attention is shifted away from imagination for a sustained period of time that this imaginary projection can be seen for the illusion that it is. The pathless path is a journey away from living in an imaginary meta-reality to being Reality, Itself. It is a journey out of the head to a non-intellectually-oriented way of life. It is being here now as a present moment movement of the entire cosmos. THIS is IT, and we are THIS, and there is nothing other than THIS. Fortunately, THIS can be realized. There's no intellectual involvement in the consensus-trance commonsense notion of physicality. It's just taken for granted unconsciously by someone living it. This despite whatever beliefs the peep might be conscious of. |
|
