Align yourself with the oneness of God/nature, align yourself with infinite abundance

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by MikeS80

That is a false projection. How do you know, I made it up? are you inside my head? As I said the Now moment is no more of a concept than the physical universe is a concept. That is like saying I made up the concept of the physical universe.

A nameless name or a wordless word only becomes named or worded the moment one associates something to them ..

Your making associations to that which is wordless and nameless and creating a concept about something that exists .

I am saying that you only know that the now moment exists because you have branded the now moment as that instead of _______ .

To speak about the universe as you do existing is correct because you have branded the universe into your ideas about it .

If you were something that wasn't able to form associations with ______ then you wouldn't be saying the now moment and the universe exists when there isn't a thought of them .

Do you understand this .

I already have agreed that what we call the universe existed prior to my thought of it but to speak about the universe in a way where I know of it as that I can't therefore say anything about the universe prior to there being a thought of it being that .


x daz x

[MikeS80]

Originally Posted by MikeS80

I see it alright but it is irrelevant because What you see visually with your 2 eyes that is right in front of you, is not a concept. Concepts are used for the unseen, not the seen, and for people who do not see the unseen.

Concepts are suppose to help the ego I see what the ego I does not see.

[MikeS80]

Originally Posted by God-Like

A nameless name or a wordless word only becomes named or worded the moment one associates something to them ..

Your making associations to that which is wordless and nameless and creating a concept about something that exists .

I am saying that you only know that the now moment exists because you have branded the now moment as that instead of _______ .

To speak about the universe as you do existing is correct because you have branded the universe into your ideas about it .

If you were something that wasn't able to form associations with ______ then you wouldn't be saying the now moment and the universe exists when there isn't a thought of them .

Do you understand this .

I already have agreed that what we call the universe existed prior to my thought of it but to speak about the universe in a way where I know of it as that I can't therefore say anything about the universe prior to there being a thought of it being that .


x daz x

I understand what you are saying but you have an extreme view of concepts that makes you miss the entire point that concepts are (suppose) to help the ego I see what the ego I does not see, such as you not seeing the now present moment.

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by MikeS80

I see it alright but it is irrelevant because What you see visually with your 2 eyes that is right in front of you, is not a concept. Concepts are used for the unseen, not the seen, and for people who do not see the unseen.

It's not irrelevant .. Your saying that what is in front of me isn't a concept but you have conceptualised what it means for there to be perception, what eyes are and what eyes do and that there is an object to be seen that is beyond a concept .

Your trying to nullify and negate conceptuality by using concepts .

You have concluded what you have because you have conceptually made sense of what you are trying to negate and nullify .

This is the classic dreamer trying to believe that they are not of the dream .

Try saying to me what you have as a conclusion without any concepts or any associations in effect .

To even acknowledge and notice something in mind like a tree one has identified that there is something there to be seen and that exists .

All these are mindful associations that bring about a sense of their reality ..

This is why I am speaking about you already having made these associations prior to trying to disassociate yourself from them .

A baby lying on the grass won't be saying the grass was here prior to me laying on it .

So even though I understand that what we call the grass was already present prior to being laid upon, what we associate existence and presence to being wasn't present .


x daz x

[MikeS80]

Originally Posted by God-Like

It's not irrelevant .. Your saying that what is in front of me isn't a concept but you have conceptualised what it means for there to be perception, what eyes are and what eyes do and that there is an object to be seen that is beyond a concept .

Your trying to nullify and negate conceptuality by using concepts .

You have concluded what you have because you have conceptually made sense of what you are trying to negate and nullify .

This is the classic dreamer trying to believe that they are not of the dream .

Try saying to me what you have as a conclusion without any concepts or any associations in effect .

To even acknowledge and notice something in mind like a tree one has identified that there is something there to be seen and that exists .

All these are mindful associations that bring about a sense of their reality ..

This is why I am speaking about you already having made these associations prior to trying to disassociate yourself from them .

A baby lying on the grass won't be saying the grass was here prior to me laying on it .

So even though I understand that what we call the grass was already present prior to being laid upon, what we associate existence and presence to being wasn't present .


x daz x

I have to conceptualize it to talk about it. How else am I going to talk about it? Would you rather not have me not talk about it, in a discussion forum?

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by MikeS80

I understand what you are saying but you have an extreme view of concepts that makes you miss the entire point that concepts are (suppose) to help the ego I see what the ego I does not see, such as you not seeing the now present moment.

Well for sure I can go to extremes at times in these instances just like peeps can go on to speak about absolutes lol .

I haven't got anything against concepts, I feel that they are a natural process of the mind and it's how we make sense of things in regards to our reality .

I have simply been emphasising and illustrating how peeps negate things on one hand and don't realize that there are negating their own foundation, like the dream character of the dream trying to speak about the absolutes and whatnot when there is only dream content present .

It becomes very contradictory and in my eyes makes no sense to negate their own premise as a means to try and promote the truth of it lol .

The teachers that speak of no ego and no identity then write books and get married lol, the teachers that speak of non duality and Oneness and Self and then divide the mind up with awareness with consciousness etc ..

x daz x

[MikeS80]

An object is not beyond a concept. An object just is/exist, like the universe just is/just exist

Originally Posted by MikeS80

An object is not beyond a concept. An object just is/exist, like the universe just is/just exist

Actually, not. Which universe exists? The one in your mind or the one outside your mind? How do you know the one in your mind is an accurate representation of what's outside your mind?

You see a table, but can you see its constituent parts? Quarks, electrons, protons, neutrons, atoms, molecules, cellular structure? Do you even see it as wood? Which concept of table will you use? Is it solid or 99.999999999% empty but for electromagnetism and the nuclear strong force?

We have an inkling what's underneath electromagnetism and the nuclear weak force, but what's underneath the electroweak force and the nuclear strong force and gravity? What about dark matter/energy?

Do you really think you know what exists and what doesn't? How do you know you're not dreaming. Right now and right here? Aside from "I think therefore I am.". Can you really be certain of anything else? Anything other than you are conscious of some thing? Of just being and nothing beyond that is a certainty?

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by MikeS80

I have to conceptualize it to talk about it. How else am I going to talk about it? Would you rather not have me not talk about it, in a discussion forum?

Yes you have to conceptualise it . This is the nature of making sense of things and labelling things . Even that which is unknown is labelled as that and is understood to mean that .

It's futile to point at the tree and say the tree is not a tree it is for example a fusion of light energy when we are simply swapping one identification with another . And what is light energy if not already conceptualised as that ..

As soon as there is an association with something perceived it becomes conceptualised . You don't even have to have a name for it . A baby might like it's favourite teddy and not know the conceptual difference between the bear and cuddly elephant that it doesn't like .

It really boils down to being aware of their reality in a way that makes sense to them .. Anything of this nature is mindfully constructed and becomes conceptualised .

There is nothing wrong with that like said for it is a natural process but what has been happening here is that the concepts have already been applied to then be taken away . It doesn't work like that .


x daz x

[MikeS80]

Originally Posted by God-Like

Well for sure I can go extreme at times in these instances just like peeps can go on to speak about absolutes lol .

I haven't got anything against concepts, I feel that they are a natural process of the mind and it's how we make sense of things in regards to our reality .

I have simply been emphasising and illustrating how peeps negate things on one hand and don't realize that there are negating their own foundation, like the dream character of the dream trying to speak about the absolutes and whatnot when there is only dream content present .

It becomes very contradictory and in my eyes makes no sense to negate their own premise as a means to try and promote the truth of it lol .

The teachers that speak of no ego and no identity then write books and get married lol, the teachers that speak of non duality and Oneness and Self and then divide the mind up with awareness with consciousness etc ..

x daz x

I hear ya, The dream, no matter how someone conceptualizes said dream is an extension of /the same as the ego I. This is how you know, this person is living in a dream/fantasy.

The ego I, to me, is the ego I that is ignorant of how important and powerful concepts and words are, thus uses words and concepts the incorrect way.

I think most guru's and teachers are talking about the ego I, in the above way. If not, you are able to tell if they are or not. Thus, I can see a guru or teacher getting married and the like.