|
|
Post by Reefs on May 27, 2022 22:46:42 GMT -5
Where do you disagree exactly? This is simply an issue of correct thinking. You see, you have a basic logic issue in your argumentation. That's why no one else here can make sense of what you are saying. Only your friends on gab can, because they have the exact same logic problem. If you want to have a meaningful conversation with us here, which I would welcome, then you have to clean up your logic. I showed you how to do it. Now it's your turn. I just dont want to do much argument in this place because I find logical fallacy in yours and you say it is in mine. So moving further doesn't go anywhere I think. So let disagree here . Well, I showed you where you made a simple mistake in logic. Now at least return the favor and show me where I made a mistake in logic. Remember, this is just a philosophical discussion. This is just making definitions and then arguing consistently based on those definitions. This is not about if what you say is actually so or not. This is not about your perspective being right or wrong or my perspective being right or wrong. This is simply about correct thinking. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on May 27, 2022 22:53:21 GMT -5
Exactly! Now hold that thought and tell me why you cannot know the nature of all the others in your experience. It can't be because the Infinite has limits, it can only be because Gopal has limits, right? When you are in doubt about the nature of others, that can only make sense from the limited perspective of Gopal that sees others as separate from himself, it makes no sense whatsoever from the perspective of the Infinite that only sees the Infinite everywhere. You can't know the name of a stranger unless he tells you, does that mean infinite has limits? Of course it does. And if you'd be logically consistent, you'd have to admit that you cannot know what I can or cannot know, right? So whatever you believe I can or cannot know is rather meaningless. Because at best your are just projecting what I can or cannot know onto me based on what you have realized about what you can or cannot know yourself. See how that works? You are violating the logic of your own argument. You want to tell me you cannot know if I am a perceiver but at the same time you are sure about the limits of what I can and cannot know. Anyway, ever heard of the omnipresence, omniscience and omnipotence of God? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2022 22:57:56 GMT -5
You can't know the name of a stranger unless he tells you, does that mean infinite has limits? Of course it does. And if you'd be logically consistent, you'd have to admit that you cannot know what I can or cannot know, right? So whatever you believe I can or cannot know is rather meaningless. Because at best your are just projecting what I can or cannot know onto me based on what you have realized about what you can or cannot know yourself. See how that works? You are violating the logic of your own argument. You want to tell me you cannot know if I am a perceiver but at the same time you are sure about the limits of what I can and cannot know. Anyway, ever heard of the omnipresence, omniscience and omnipotence of God? Can You tell me what is my first name? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2022 23:00:28 GMT -5
I just dont want to do much argument in this place because I find logical fallacy in yours and you say it is in mine. So moving further doesn't go anywhere I think. So let disagree here . Well, I showed you where you made a simple mistake in logic. Now at least return the favor and show me where I made a mistake in logic. Remember, this is just a philosophical discussion. This is just making definitions and then arguing consistently based on those definitions. This is not about if what you say is actually so or not. This is not about your perspective being right or wrong or my perspective being right or wrong. This is simply about correct thinking. I don't think there is a mistake in my logic. I am saying Infinite is directly looking at the ongoing perception. So there is no limit, you say since I named that view point as Gopal, Infinite is having a limit. How could it be? |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on May 27, 2022 23:04:06 GMT -5
Of course it does. And if you'd be logically consistent, you'd have to admit that you cannot know what I can or cannot know, right? So whatever you believe I can or cannot know is rather meaningless. Because at best your are just projecting what I can or cannot know onto me based on what you have realized about what you can or cannot know yourself. See how that works? You are violating the logic of your own argument. You want to tell me you cannot know if I am a perceiver but at the same time you are sure about the limits of what I can and cannot know. Anyway, ever heard of the omnipresence, omniscience and omnipotence of God? Can You tell me what is my first name? I could. Any good psychic can do that. So that wouldn't prove anything. Niz was actually asked that same question once. He also said that he could but he hasn't developed that skill. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2022 23:05:37 GMT -5
Can You tell me what is my first name? I could. Any good psychic can do that. So that wouldn't prove anything. Niz was actually asked that same question once. He also said that he could but he hasn't developed that skill. Then Infinite has to develop some kind of psychic power to know my name? Does it not a limit again? |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on May 27, 2022 23:07:38 GMT -5
Well, I showed you where you made a simple mistake in logic. Now at least return the favor and show me where I made a mistake in logic. Remember, this is just a philosophical discussion. This is just making definitions and then arguing consistently based on those definitions. This is not about if what you say is actually so or not. This is not about your perspective being right or wrong or my perspective being right or wrong. This is simply about correct thinking. I don't think there is a mistake in my logic. I am saying Infinite is directly looking at the ongoing perception. So there is no limit, you say since I named that view point as Gopal, Infinite is having a limit. How could it be? The name of the window, even the window the Infinite is looking thru doesn't matter at all. What matterrs is how that looking happens. Does it happen from the personal or impesonal perspective and do you therefore see only thingness or also suchness? The limited Gopal perspective that doesn't know anything about others can only perceive thingness. The Infinite looking thru the window of Gopal with the eyes of the Infinite, however, can also see suchness. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2022 23:09:43 GMT -5
I don't think there is a mistake in my logic. I am saying Infinite is directly looking at the ongoing perception. So there is no limit, you say since I named that view point as Gopal, Infinite is having a limit. How could it be? The name of the window, even the window the Infinite is looking thru doesn't matter at all. What matterrs is how that looking happens. Does it happen from the personal or impesonal perspective and do you therefore see only thingness or also suchness? The limited Gopal perspective that doesn't know anything about others can only perceive thingness. The Infinite looking thru the window of Gopal with the eyes of the Infinite, however, can also see suchness. You misunderstood me here. The window I am talking about doesn't exist in itself for infinite to look through. I am naming view point as window. Infinite is looking at the ongoing appearance. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on May 27, 2022 23:10:16 GMT -5
I could. Any good psychic can do that. So that wouldn't prove anything. Niz was actually asked that same question once. He also said that he could but he hasn't developed that skill. Then Infinite has to develop some kind of psychic power to know my name? Does it not a limit again? The limit is with the specific physical setting, not with the Infinite. Notice how Niz didn't categorically deny that possibility like you are doing. He just denied its feasibility thru the window called Niz at that moment. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on May 27, 2022 23:12:07 GMT -5
The name of the window, even the window the Infinite is looking thru doesn't matter at all. What matterrs is how that looking happens. Does it happen from the personal or impesonal perspective and do you therefore see only thingness or also suchness? The limited Gopal perspective that doesn't know anything about others can only perceive thingness. The Infinite looking thru the window of Gopal with the eyes of the Infinite, however, can also see suchness. You misunderstood me here. The window I am talking about doesn't exist in itself for infinite to look through. I am naming view point as window. Infinite is looking at the ongoing appearance. I understood you perfectly right. It's all the Infinite. The Infinite is all there is. The windows are also the Infinite. The personal is part of the impersonal. That's why your argument that you cannot know anything about the other windows or what's behind those windows makes no sense. Just logic 101. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2022 23:14:55 GMT -5
Then Infinite has to develop some kind of psychic power to know my name? Does it not a limit again? The limit is with the specific physical setting, not with the Infinite. Notice how Niz didn't categorically deny that possibility like you are doing. He just denied its feasibility thru the window called Niz at that moment. If so, are you not infinite ? Who are you? As said in your earlier comment, your individual aspect is dangling from infinite and energy is moving from infinite to you? That's called separation. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2022 23:18:03 GMT -5
You misunderstood me here. The window I am talking about doesn't exist in itself for infinite to look through. I am naming view point as window. Infinite is looking at the ongoing appearance. I understood you perfectly right. It's all the Infinite. The Infinite is all there is. The windows are also the Infinite. The personal is part of the impersonal. That's why your argument that you cannot know anything about the other windows or what's behind those windows makes no sense. Just logic 101. But you agree that you can't know my first name ? While you being an infinite can't even know about my name, how are you going to know about other window of perception? You still haven't developed some kind of psychic power to know about other window ? That said you agree with me that you too do not know about other people existence, eh? |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on May 27, 2022 23:26:30 GMT -5
The limit is with the specific physical setting, not with the Infinite. Notice how Niz didn't categorically deny that possibility like you are doing. He just denied its feasibility thru the window called Niz at that moment. If so, are you not infinite ? Who are you? As said in your earlier comment, your individual aspect is dangling from infinite and energy is moving from infinite to you? That's called separation. Okay, I think I see the problem in your understanding. It seems you are confusing oneness with interconnenctedness. If I would have the skills to tell you your name or tell you what picture is on your desk (Tzu's favorite task for Enigma, hehe), then at best that can prove interconnectedness, not oneness. Do you understand the difference between interconnectedness and oneness? |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on May 27, 2022 23:31:53 GMT -5
I understood you perfectly right. It's all the Infinite. The Infinite is all there is. The windows are also the Infinite. The personal is part of the impersonal. That's why your argument that you cannot know anything about the other windows or what's behind those windows makes no sense. Just logic 101. But you agree that you can't know my first name ? While you being an infinite can't even know about my name, how are you going to know about other window of perception? You still haven't developed some kind of psychic power to know about other window ? That said you agree with me that you too do not know about other people existence, eh? No, I don't agree with you. You keep confusing some things here. Knowing your true nature and therefore the nature of others doesn't mean you are able to name everyone and everything correctly. One doesn't have anything to do with the other. As I just said, one doesn't have to be self-realized to know Gopals first name or what picture Tzu has on his desk. Any good psychic can do that. And anyone interested in such skills can do that as well. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2022 23:41:46 GMT -5
But you agree that you can't know my first name ? While you being an infinite can't even know about my name, how are you going to know about other window of perception? You still haven't developed some kind of psychic power to know about other window ? That said you agree with me that you too do not know about other people existence, eh? No, I don't agree with you. You keep confusing some things here. Knowing your true nature and therefore the nature of others doesn't mean you are able to name everyone and everything correctly. One doesn't have anything to do with the other. As I just said, one doesn't have to be self-realized to know Gopals first name or what picture Tzu has on his desk. Any good psychic can do that. And anyone interested in such skills can do that as well. It goes on like this Reefs, It doesn't end anywhere. One day in future it may make sense to you about what I am talking now. Until then let me wait. |
|
