realization

[jufa]

I quote; end quote.
It was a bitter war between me and my old compardre[whom, issued me into a forgotten creep show]. I end quote. It is better to state it, A=A. Then, to alternate the both.
An equilibrium of haitis. When, does A not equal A?
A situation came up when I was 4 yrs. of age. Undoubtedly, the war continues. Consciouly, I am aware of it! The A=A query. That doesn't mean I am not at war with A=A. It simply is a frame of thought. I am at war. I hate it but I will eventually win. As commander of my own will. I attain it. It's there...
Whom ever choses to be there. It is a simple formula. Dan Rowdan, or QRS. What formula is there? I was 4 and the void came up to me and thus was I intermediately sought out by the fuckin reality of it! - ForbidenRea

I have only been given half and answer. From a 4 yr old at that. I cannot reply until the ForbidenRea who equal ForbidenRea give the rest of this 4 yr old child story.

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa

[Dennis Mahar]

MV,

This has scope to be very liberating within the 'right' cerebrum.

It has as means for awakening.
All phenomena,
labels, memories, feelings, thoughts, emotions, body sensations, bodies,
are objects.
They are objects because they can be 'seen', viewed.

If they are not objectified,
not realised as phenomena,
attached to,
then a sense of 'I' is taken on and believed in,
these phenomena become 'me' and 'mine' and one has a story about 'me'.
One falls in to a trance.
One is a history of labels.
One is identified.

To objectify these phenomena,
disidentifies,
breaks the labels, the history.

The question is now,
who objectifies objects,
who knows the known.

subject and object arising together.

If I'm sitting here in a roomful of objects'
Is it all me.
Yes.
And I'm hearing traffic noise.
Is the traffic noise me.
Yes.

[Pam Seeback]

MV,

This has scope to be very liberating within the 'right' cerebrum.

It has as means for awakening.
All phenomena,
labels, memories, feelings, thoughts, emotions, body sensations, bodies,
are objects.
They are objects because they can be 'seen', viewed.

If they are not objectified,
not realised as phenomena,
attached to,
then a sense of 'I' is taken on and believed in,
these phenomena become 'me' and 'mine' and one has a story about 'me'.
One falls in to a trance.
One is a history of labels.
One is identified.

To objectify these phenomena,
disidentifies,
breaks the labels, the history.

The question is now,
who objectifies objects,
who knows the known.

subject and object arising together.

If I'm sitting here in a roomful of objects'
Is it all me.
Yes.
And I'm hearing traffic noise.
Is the traffic noise me.
Yes.

And once one knows they are the traffic noise, or the tree, or the sky, I am That, wisdom dictates that that one cease telling stories about these things. To continue giving life to one's reflection or image makes a man who believes himself wise not wise at all, but the ultimate fool and/or narcissist. This is the reason why spiritual men repent the continuum or eternality of mirror gazing-talk and instead, devote their lives to reconciling the subjective-objective image back to its source.

[Tomas]

Yet here we are day after day pretending or imagining to spout wise.


Hahahahahah

[Pam Seeback]

hahahaha indeed. The wise man is a man, who, if he could bear it, would be laughing 24/7.

[Gurrb]

the only way to win at war is to surrender. see, i can do it too.

[Dennis Mahar]

he only way to win at war is to surrender. see, i can do it too.

Nah, you're running strategy.
'fess up and we can laugh together.

[Pam Seeback]

The only war a man wages is within himself. The only surrendering a man does is to himself.

And yeah, Dennis, when we 'fess up that we are but vessels for thought for which we know naught, we can indeed laugh together. Is there an earthly experience more pleasurable than laughing at the seriousness with which we undertake the human condition [pun intended]? Not as far as I am concerned!

[ForbidenRea]

Why are we 'moving always?'

The spells on earth; the regressions of a make-shift, beat-up apeshit mind! An unwelcomed eternity! A severe truth that all beginnings are the oar to a beatiful reality. Realization is a fake. A total realization of further reaches. A bitter war of liveliness and bitch-ass frequency.

This being said.

I am a religious fanatic. I cohere to A=A. The under developed mind. A=A. It has thus been used.

[ForbidenRea]

What's the point?

What's yours?

I don't know.

I'm not afraid.

[ForbidenRea]

"Somewhat allied to the philosophy of religion is the science of ethics. It is equally useless. Now books of casuistry, indeed, using the word 'casuistry' not in any technical sense, but merely to signify discussions of what ought to be done in various difficult situations...'

Charles S. Pierce,
1839-1914

[Pam Seeback]

Why are we 'moving always?'

The spells on earth; the regressions of a make-shift, beat-up apeshit mind! An unwelcomed eternity! A severe truth that all beginnings are the oar to a beatiful reality. Realization is a fake. A total realization of further reaches. A bitter war of liveliness and bitch-ass frequency.

This being said.

I am a religious fanatic. I cohere to A=A. The under developed mind. A=A. It has thus been used.

As sense-attached beings, we are being moved always beyond this moment of identification into another moment of identification, A = A. An unwelcomed eternity indeed, when we wake up to the truth that identification is the engine by which one's senses of dualism are activated; as the world of moral and immoral and amoral causality turns and turns and turns...

The remedy? As I see it, there is but one. To identify only with the movement of being finished with identification. To be consciously moved of the thought of being expanded beyond this eternity of the birth and death of sensing a known cause that in truth, is actually an effect of a cause unknown.

[Pam Seeback]

All Along the Watchtower

"There must be some way out of here" said the joker to the thief
"There's too much confusion", I can't get no relief
Businessmen, they drink my wine, plowmen dig my earth
None of them along the line know what any of it is worth.

"No reason to get excited", the thief he kindly spoke
"There are many here among us who feel that life is but a joke
But you and I, we've been through that, and this is not our fate
So let us not talk falsely now, the hour is getting late".

All along the watchtower, princes kept the view
While all the women came and went, barefoot servants, too.

Outside in the distance a wildcat did growl
Two riders were approaching, the wind began to howl.

~ Bob Dylan

[Dennis Mahar]

All Along the Watchtower

No way!
I was humming that all day yesterday.
Quit raiding my mind please.

And yeah, Dennis, when we 'fess up that we are but vessels for thought for which we know naught, we can indeed laugh together. Is there an earthly experience more pleasurable than laughing at the seriousness with which we undertake the human condition [pun intended]? Not as far as I am concerned!

I like it!

[ForbidenRea]

Moving Always==
The path to enlightenment is shown through basic analogies. Wence, came the egg. Religion. God creates man. Man, is unreal. We see throught it as we know the dismissal of causation, on a day to day basis.
I know this person. She is fine. The situations we are faced with everyday-as you were saying-gives us the antedote for what 'he or she' has brought to the state-of-universe. But, genius goes beyond the means of forfeiting numbers.
I've exclaimed my point to the One==
Earth, presumably, I believe will exist forever. What of that/? For all existences, foreign and abroad. The universe, as pinch paxton put it, is a more proximate hexagonal sphere. If I were to drop a coin into mid-air. I've spilled it into the universe. That's how I've expounded on A=A. Thus, matter of importance.
Or, so I say.

[eyekwah]

Coming in a bit late..

If an issue has two sides, is everyone moronic for having chosen a side which others have chosen? Or is there precedence? Is the first to pick a side less moronic than another who ultimately chooses the same side? Would it surprise you to then know that others before you have thought the same as you?

Saying that genius is nonconformity is so cliched that being nonconformist is still being conformist, difference being only the level of irony. I'm sick of being exposed to people who think genius is about pretending to be smarter than others.

[Pam Seeback]

ForbiddenRea, your reasoning that the earth will exist forever is flawed, because our sun will not exist forever. First came the sun, then came its planets. When the sun is "done" being a sun and becomes a red giant, so will its planets be "done" being planets. Being aware of the inevitable end of sentience effects how we reason our existence "before" and "after" the existence of the sun/sentience. Hence the arrival of the "point to the One", to That which exists regardless of the appearance and eventual disappearance of sentient's reason for existing, oxygen.

We see throught it as we know the dismissal of causation, on a day to day basis.

Can you expand on this thought?

[Pam Seeback]

Coming in a bit late..

If an issue has two sides, is everyone moronic for having chosen a side which others have chosen? Or is there precedence? Is the first to pick a side less moronic than another who ultimately chooses the same side? Would it surprise you to then know that others before you have thought the same as you?

Saying that genius is nonconformity is so cliched that being nonconformist is still being conformist, difference being only the level of irony. I'm sick of being exposed to people who think genius is about pretending to be smarter than others.

eyekwah, the real issue is that one believes there can be two sides to the one reality that they are. A true "genius" gets to the bottom of this issue of duality and resolves it for himself. Which has nothing to do with being smart but everything to do with being persistent and single-minded.

[mental vagrant]

Coming in a bit late..

If an issue has two sides, is everyone moronic for having chosen a side which others have chosen? Or is there precedence? Is the first to pick a side less moronic than another who ultimately chooses the same side? Would it surprise you to then know that others before you have thought the same as you?

Saying that genius is nonconformity is so cliched that being nonconformist is still being conformist, difference being only the level of irony. I'm sick of being exposed to people who think genius is about pretending to be smarter than others.

Is that happening here? How would you stop it? Is everything to be gained?

[cousinbasil]

Great minds think alike...?

[eyekwah]

If each one of us tends to aggregate to the same collective idea, does that necessarily mean he's right? If I think the same as John Locke on some point, does that mean I'm lending my mind to someone who has already thought of it before me? Not necessarily. True, I could have read up on Locke and said to myself, "Hmm.. that guy has it together.. I think he's right about that issue.." And if that were the case for each one of us, I would say he's right.

Though what's the point of believing in something if it wasn't born in you to begin with? If someone convinces you about some issue, in a way, your perspective was stolen and replaced by another's. Ask any politician. They understand this better than most.

Is that happening here? How would you stop it? Is everything to be gained?

Could you stop something like that? If I convinced each and every one of you to think in your own way and not like someone else, you're ultimately still following what I said to do, even if the point was to do the complete opposite. It's like me saying "Simon says, 'Don't do what Simon says.'"

[cousinbasil]

Though what's the point of believing in something if it wasn't born in you to begin with? If someone convinces you about some issue, in a way, your perspective was stolen and replaced by another's. Ask any politician. They understand this better than most.

As for the politician, think in terms of cognitive dissonance, and a person's natural tendency to minimize it. The often-repeated psychology experiment goes something like this: If you were talked into giving a speech against pre-marital sex to a group of impressionable youth, and you did this a few times, you will tend to start believing in what you were telling them, even if you had formerly no opinion or your own viewpoint had been "we don't need no paper from the city hall..." And since there are always at least two parts to a good psych experiment, imagine you were paid $10, 000 to give those same talks. Result? Your original viewpoint will not change. The reason? The first scenario has you thinking "I believe A, but I am telling these kids B. Do I really believe A?" The second scenario, no such cognitive dissonance. You know why you are giving a talk opposing your own beliefs - for the money.

You are a politician.

Politicians don't have their perspective stolen - they sell it.

[Gurrb]

we do not know when we know that which we should not know.

a gift is wrapped with the sole purpose of being opened.

if we do not understand through experience, we will not.

join me in this void we consider meaningful existence.

[mental vagrant]

If each one of us tends to aggregate to the same collective idea, does that necessarily mean he's right? If I think the same as John Locke on some point, does that mean I'm lending my mind to someone who has already thought of it before me? Not necessarily. True, I could have read up on Locke and said to myself, "Hmm.. that guy has it together.. I think he's right about that issue.." And if that were the case for each one of us, I would say he's right.

Though what's the point of believing in something if it wasn't born in you to begin with? If someone convinces you about some issue, in a way, your perspective was stolen and replaced by another's. Ask any politician. They understand this better than most.

Is that happening here? How would you stop it? Is everything to be gained?

Could you stop something like that? If I convinced each and every one of you to think in your own way and not like someone else, you're ultimately still following what I said to do, even if the point was to do the complete opposite. It's like me saying "Simon says, 'Don't do what Simon says.'"

Empathy vs sympathy. Appreciation over adoption is my view of most shared learnings. I think there is a mix of both in most people.

[ForbidenRea]

MovingAlways,

I have already realized the infinite.

Quantum Mechanics.