My understanding of wisdom--

[FallingLeaves]

Originally Posted by firstandlast

Like just a reminder, there is something behind all this garment of forms trying to communicate using the forms to the best of his ability-- But it looks like I have not even been heard once yet here--

I mean, I only feel trapped when you rather deal with the forms rather than communicate with the spirit behind these forms; which is all I seen going on here, in that you are dealing with the forms and not honoring the perspective unless it is out of some automatic response just to try and respect me.. which btw, I do not see as respect in the slightest; its really rather demeaning when I try my best to express myself with the given tools we share--

it is very difficult, to try to use words to express something that words can't express. Some would say, impossible. The problem is, the words chop the idea into pieces, and usually this kind of 'sword' isn't able to be well enough used to chop the pieces in what would be the best places. God (if you believe in him) said at one point he is the only one with a sword fine enough to be effective in this regards. But apparently he doesn't want to enlighten us with the results. And even when there is a 'close enough' chopping going on it really isn't up to the person who is sayin gsomething, as to how others will then decide to take it. Things can easily take on a life of their own.

First, the person saying the original words traps himself in ways that he may not even realize, then the person readin traps himself in the words he read, then in responding he traps himself in the response, and so it goes. It is even worse for me because I tend to believe that once I am trapped I have to STAY trapped and can't go oblique and get myself out of it.

I'm aware there is something beyond the words (in my case it precedes them and may even be considered a 'cause' in some sense) but even if I could communicate with that instead of with the words, and you could receive it, I don't know if in essence it would really be any different than communicating with the words we are currently using. Maybe, it would just be different kinds of words for me to get lost in. I really don't have the experience to know that at this point.

As far as communicating the 'spirit' of things, which exact spirit are you trying to communicate? Because there are a lot of them. And how exactly do you propose that the spirit you chose comes out and play, in this kind of forum which is almost 100% made up of the very thing you understand as playing against it?

If all you are trying to do is point out there is something beyond these veils we put up between ourselves and each other and life, and kinda give your idea of how that works, well i got that message a long time ago. There is actually a teaching that starts out with that premise and then goes expanding on other very real aspects of life.

The standard approach for one who has fully received the teaching is to quit communicating in words at all, for example there is a quote out of ancient china which goes like this:

“The fish trap exists because of the fish. Once you've gotten the fish you can forget the trap. The rabbit snare exists because of the rabbit. Once you've gotten the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words exist because of meaning. Once you've gotten the meaning, you can forget the words. Where can I find a man who has forgotten words so I can talk with him?”
― Zhuangzi


Incidentally the last sentence highlights the main trick this sect plays with words... instead of going linear with a statement you state what looks like a paradox at first glance, but really you've switch the exact meaning of the words mid-track then anyone who is clued into the system gets to think about what the 'enhanced' meaning might be and everyone else is just amused by wordplay. Gets them out of having fights with random strangers, over the meaning of words, which in some sense is useless after all.

There are a lot of tricks played with words, it isn't nearly as binding as you think.... for example some people down through history have only 'seen' the patterns formed by the first letters of words and just ignore the rest as noise (something which recently has been popularized with acronyms) ... and others talk in vague generalities and expect you to figure out from the context what they mean. For example there was a star trek: next generation episode where the aliens used the context of their own history, then emoted by naming a person and a place of importance and expecting the other party to know the shared context in order to get at the meaning.

Cyphers are similar to this, you have to know some shared 'key' to be able to decipher them. Even people who decrypt a cypher without the key have shared contexts such as the fact that 'e' is the most prevalent character in the english language, and other things you can reason about knowing what you know about the target language, that would either limit what can be expressed or otherwise shed light on what might have been expressed. I've been made to understand there are also other approaches to the whole word thing that I don't know about right now. If you are interested the fact that noone even 'knows' about such 'languages' beyond their own is the same as the fact of babylon.

I can't say I understood 100% where you are coming from as I haven't seen it put exactly the way you put it before, but I did think I got the general drift and it is something that is obvious to me as well.
----------------------------------------------------
So what was I supposed to say to you? Was I supposed to nit pick and say this and this and this about your idea isn't perfect and here is the 'correct' words you should use to describe it? Your very idea belies that notion, and you know it.

Was I supposed to agree wholeheartedly with your idea and lend support to your insite? I've done that sort of thing in the past, but any more I can see how damaging it is to someone who is learning to walk, to try to prop them up instead of letting them find their own legs.

Was I supposed to try to figure out the 'correct' words that brought out the 'spirit' you are looking for? Again the very concept you espouse belies such a thought.

Or are you lookin for something else entirely? What exactly are you expecting here?

In the end I can only say what I can say, and it is up to you to do what you want with it. That is something else you learn to understand about life when you have studied enough. You can't always have what you want and sometimes just have to make do with what is available?

But anyway, if you don't want to be trapped by words then don't be trapped by words, it isn't anyone else's responsibility to make it so. But it may not be so easy if you want others to become similarly capable.

However, I will note that in my view and contrary to popular opinion, sometimes the fastest route to freedom is to become entangled in a snare.

[firstandlast]

Originally Posted by FallingLeaves

it is very difficult, to try to use words to express something that words can't express. Some would say, impossible. The problem is, the words chop the idea into pieces, and usually this kind of 'sword' isn't able to be well enough used to chop the pieces in what would be the best places. God (if you believe in him) said at one point he is the only one with a sword fine enough to be effective in this regards. But apparently he doesn't want to enlighten us with the results. And even when there is a 'close enough' chopping going on it really isn't up to the person who is sayin gsomething, as to how others will then decide to take it. Things can easily take on a life of their own.

First, the person saying the original words traps himself in ways that he may not even realize, then the person readin traps himself in the words he read, then in responding he traps himself in the response, and so it goes. It is even worse for me because I tend to believe that once I am trapped I have to STAY trapped and can't go oblique and get myself out of it.

I'm aware there is something beyond the words (in my case it precedes them and may even be considered a 'cause' in some sense) but even if I could communicate with that instead of with the words, and you could receive it, I don't know if in essence it would really be any different than communicating with the words we are currently using. Maybe, it would just be different kinds of words for me to get lost in. I really don't have the experience to know that at this point.

As far as communicating the 'spirit' of things, which exact spirit are you trying to communicate? Because there are a lot of them. And how exactly do you propose that the spirit you chose comes out and play, in this kind of forum which is almost 100% made up of the very thing you understand as playing against it?

If all you are trying to do is point out there is something beyond these veils we put up between ourselves and each other and life, and kinda give your idea of how that works, well i got that message a long time ago. There is actually a teaching that starts out with that premise and then goes expanding on other very real aspects of life.

The standard approach for one who has fully received the teaching is to quit communicating in words at all, for example there is a quote out of ancient china which goes like this:

“The fish trap exists because of the fish. Once you've gotten the fish you can forget the trap. The rabbit snare exists because of the rabbit. Once you've gotten the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words exist because of meaning. Once you've gotten the meaning, you can forget the words. Where can I find a man who has forgotten words so I can talk with him?”
― Zhuangzi


Incidentally the last sentence highlights the main trick this sect plays with words... instead of going linear with a statement you state what looks like a paradox at first glance, but really you've switch the exact meaning of the words mid-track then anyone who is clued into the system gets to think about what the 'enhanced' meaning might be and everyone else is just amused by wordplay. Gets them out of having fights with random strangers, over the meaning of words, which in some sense is useless after all.

There are a lot of tricks played with words, it isn't nearly as binding as you think.... for example some people down through history have only 'seen' the patterns formed by the first letters of words and just ignore the rest as noise (something which recently has been popularized with acronyms) ... and others talk in vague generalities and expect you to figure out from the context what they mean. For example there was a star trek: next generation episode where the aliens used the context of their own history, then emoted by naming a person and a place of importance and expecting the other party to know the shared context in order to get at the meaning.

Cyphers are similar to this, you have to know some shared 'key' to be able to decipher them. Even people who decrypt a cypher without the key have shared contexts such as the fact that 'e' is the most prevalent character in the english language, and other things you can reason about knowing what you know about the target language, that would either limit what can be expressed or otherwise shed light on what might have been expressed. I've been made to understand there are also other approaches to the whole word thing that I don't know about right now. If you are interested the fact that noone even 'knows' about such 'languages' beyond their own is the same as the fact of babylon.

I can't say I understood 100% where you are coming from as I haven't seen it put exactly the way you put it before, but I did think I got the general drift and it is something that is obvious to me as well.
----------------------------------------------------
So what was I supposed to say to you? Was I supposed to nit pick and say this and this and this about your idea isn't perfect and here is the 'correct' words you should use to describe it? Your very idea belies that notion, and you know it.

Was I supposed to agree wholeheartedly with your idea and lend support to your insite? I've done that sort of thing in the past, but any more I can see how damaging it is to someone who is learning to walk, to try to prop them up instead of letting them find their own legs.

Was I supposed to try to figure out the 'correct' words that brought out the 'spirit' you are looking for? Again the very concept you espouse belies such a thought.

Or are you lookin for something else entirely? What exactly are you expecting here?

In the end I can only say what I can say, and it is up to you to do what you want with it. That is something else you learn to understand about life when you have studied enough. You can't always have what you want and sometimes just have to make do with what is available?

But anyway, if you don't want to be trapped by words then don't be trapped by words, it isn't anyone else's responsibility to make it so. But it may not be so easy if you want others to become similarly capable.

However, I will note that in my view and contrary to popular opinion, sometimes the fastest route to freedom is to become entangled in a snare.

My spirit is 100% the choice to express myself; there is no other spirit than my spirit of self expression; and every choice I make is the same choice regardless of form or appearance, because the choice in how I express myself is unique to every moment; sometimes I will give rise to other purpose within self expression, but that to is only a greater formation of that self expressed in the conditions of self it finds-- So sometimes appearing as a "lesser" spirit is more conducive to my "higher" or all encompassing spirit--

I wasn't looking for anything, posted without expectations except possibly the point to be understood-- Which boiled down, would possibly be "to make one coherent intent within self, so that every choice is conducive to bringing that intent into greater form"

Wisdom to me is a method of use in the veils, but if you want to consider the words in all those limited contexts; and give definition to things before I have defined them; then you point out the very labyrinth you have created before our spirits can even meet-- And I see this daily, and it was expected; but I didn't post it with the intent of this argument, which points out some discoherent spirits within me; so of course not a waste in my own work, which is to better express myself, not necessarily to be understood; but to exceed those arrangements before hand in which the form inadequately allowed us to deal with each other on happier terms--

Right now, to be specific; I mean it on happier terms, because something about you I quite like, and so for you to be happy would be part of my self expression, as you aren't really separate from that when I say such a notion--

Sometimes, however; I want others to be ****ed, because that would be a better self expression... I only know this when I see it; because it is on approach--

That being said; this is all pretty much just rambling from an insane mind in a sane world-- Which means whatever you make of it--

----------------------

I do however get quite tired of people thinking I don't understand the basic principles of all these matters, when if you understood what I was saying; you would see that I have surpassed such thinking (not meaning so advanced, but that what I say has already taken such concepts into account--)

Yet just incase I missed something, or something personal is involved (which is really how I am trying to speak; though people confused personal and big complex ideas as something different; as I am only ever talking about myself, I am that big of an ego, lol) I read it over and take my time to make sure I understand where you are actually coming from since you can't make heads or tails of where I am coming from and that is evident in your response--

I get this in person too, until they shut up and listen; then the veils break down in front of them, but this really requires a personal touch and so in person this is much more easily reached-- Too the point where I have to shut up, and the best place for me to talk without shredding people's conceptions of the world, is the distant complicated talk of a distorted tongue that sounds like its talking about anything other than what he is at that time and place, which may seem entirely different in another time and place as to seem like two totally different spirits (but coherent in self).. which if you understood deeply the nature of death, you might know what that means of me in order to be like that--

Cuz I am not always the same "spirit" if you understand spirit to be any specific form-- oh well really this is just rambling to me-- I move on!

ty for responding in any capacity--

Originally Posted by SecretDreams333

language is not really any kind of knowledge its a trap for the soul
in a 3D matrix , it builds up a system based on language which are the walls of its prison through which no light shines anymore every word has a known meaning yes those are the bricks in the wall. keep on building you been spending so much time on it so much certainty comes from heavy brick walls all around you
such a secure totally individual separated feeling in the darkness all alone

1) How do you make that out?

And 2) are you talking about just verbal language (written or spoken) or other communication media that have linguistic properties?

...

Originally Posted by FallingLeaves

it is very difficult, to try to use words to express something that words can't express. Some would say, impossible.

That's right. You can't convey your experiences because there's no experiential vocabulary. You can hope only that someone has parallel experiences with roughly a parallel emotional impact. If you've ever had a headache and I tell you I have a headache, you'll know roughly what I mean but neither of us could convey to the other the actual experiential qualities of our headaches. Or...try to describe "red" without pointing to something you see that's red. Try describing a rainbow to a person blind from birth.

First, the person saying the original words traps himself in ways that he may not even realize, then the person readin traps himself in the words he read, then in responding he traps himself in the response, and so it goes.

Well, it depends. "Words" as information language will tend to reduce uncertainty as long as the listener can decode the message. We use adjectives to particularise a phenomenon where possible. Where it fails is with abstract nouns / constructs. Trouble is, without trying, the non-speaker or the one desperate to express some aspect of themselves/experiences ends up imprisoned by their inability to communicate something that would lead to their escape. An empath might deduce more from the available signs because for humans, words are just a small part of communication (beyond the conveyance of information).

So it would seem.

There are other sonic media with which to communicate (otherwise we wouldn't have film music, frinstance), not as specific but often touching closer to the emotions, sometimes via the senses.

The question seems to be how does someone turn experiences into information if feeling it necessary to convey? It may be possible if the hierarchy of the semantics can be grasped; if suitable metaphors can be sorted out. May be possible using media away from words - or words used poetically that defy the ordinarily understood semantics and grammar (or mix them with the "standard").

I generally agree with the content of this topic, often complain here about the failure of words. We can talk about "spirit" because most here have acknowledged there's more to life than organic matter interacting with the inorganic; have experienced or at least recognise the metaphysical. We have our beliefs but there's a recognition of spirit / the spirit world / the astral / dreams.... Does the fact that the words signify different precise concepts to us individually matter?

....

[firstandlast]

Originally Posted by Lorelyen

That's right. You can't convey your experiences because there's no experiential vocabulary. You can hope only that someone has parallel experiences with roughly a parallel emotional impact. If you've ever had a headache and I tell you I have a headache, you'll know roughly what I mean but neither of us could convey to the other the actual experiential qualities of our headaches. Or...try to describe "red" without pointing to something you see that's red. Try describing a rainbow to a person blind from birth.


Well, it depends. "Words" as information language will tend to reduce uncertainty as long as the listener can decode the message. We use adjectives to particularise a phenomenon where possible. Where it fails is with abstract nouns / constructs. Trouble is, without trying, the non-speaker or the one desperate to express some aspect of themselves/experiences ends up imprisoned by their inability to communicate something that would lead to their escape. An empath might deduce more from the available signs because for humans, words are just a small part of communication (beyond the conveyance of information).

So it would seem.

There are other sonic media with which to communicate (otherwise we wouldn't have film music, frinstance), not as specific but often touching closer to the emotions, sometimes via the senses.

The question seems to be how does someone turn experiences into information if feeling it necessary to convey? It may be possible if the hierarchy of the semantics can be grasped; if suitable metaphors can be sorted out. May be possible using media away from words - or words used poetically that defying the ordinarily understood semantics and grammar.

I generally agree with the content of this topic, often complain here about the failure of words. A background in semiotics is a definite disadvantage. We can talk about "spirit" because most here have acknowledged there's more to life than organic matter interacting with the inorganic; have experienced or at least recognise the metaphysical. We have our beliefs but there's a commonality in spirit / the spirit world / the astral / dreams....

....

It is a matter of every thought we need in order to understand something being the distance we are from its true meaning which is inherent and self evident in the illuminated perspective--

Like I speak from an emptiness, there is no thought behind what I say; I speak as I am-- But until what "I am" is evident, I must speak to a greater distance, and this varies in degrees--

Right now I am a fairytale to you, a myth from the past-- But up close I am alive and mean what I am, and that is the only thing I could mean--

But such that I am saying is so rare, and philosophy and wisdom as a living relationship has been so forgotten, that I must explain myself away-- It is not a matter of these forms being limited in expression, for limits are what allow us to see an eternity of unlimited expression-- But we choose to approach our limits, rather than our freedom; and as a collective upon myself, that's pretty painful to emerge this awake while the most awake are still vastly asleep and only appear awake to dimmer lights--

While my light is neither light or dark, but emptiness and itself whether being light or dark-- I am of the greater darkness, which is the greater light--

But belief in what I say of this is hard, because most people still think in terms of something to believe, rather than to understand; no one wants to grow, they want to cling to the same failing ideals of thousands of years past-- But those ideals are just faded, they need vitality of a living expression-- But so many strive to be a form, rather than their own spirit-- Convinced that means a specific way, when I mean that as every way; including those you may condemn--

Such is the choice to beat like a heart, or be the heart of a beat--

[firstandlast]

And though I imply from that angle of expression the dimness of humanities illumination, the underlying coherence is in that I see us as all stars; and I cannot wait until I see a sky shining more brightly, as light pollution tells us many things about our state of being, but I am beyond that which shines--

[firstandlast]

Like its really simple and beyond conception; you are simply forgetting yourself in the forms.. that's all-- Its so easy to get lost in the labyrinth--

Remember yourself as a being, and everything else will fall into place; and no form is taboo in this state; no way is necessary, but that way which you are-- you are of the way, but what way am I? I am the way of I am-- This is true for anyone; but hard to remember, and harder to face it with increasing depth, because you emerge from yourself, no where else can tell you who you are, unless you meet yourself in another-- And that is all I meet--


With that in mind, my original statement should be clearer, even though it appears to be from an entirely different way of being--

[SecretDreams333]

Originally Posted by Lorelyen

1) How do you make that out?

And 2) are you talking about just verbal language (written or spoken) or other communication media that have linguistic properties?

...

hi the problem seem to be in the use of written language spoken is sound
so is send differently
think of those that would want to have a bible followed to the letter
why ? to me it looks like that it is as if a set of lines is drawn in a hologram
in each participants mind
the lines are the written text remembered as images
this pattern is shared in this way so it has to be the same for the match in sharing to be the best
the better the match the better shared , the more same energy is shared
the stronger the shared feeling
and this is perceived as a shared truth or as THE TRUTH
that's how a human soul can work
sounds are also collective shared and images to but they are the female energy part of the mind
the written language lines thing in the male
so the male energy wants to rule as reality over the female
and does it in that way
look around it happens when written text in books is so used , shared among followers
girls get the blame while both energies are found each one

[SecretDreams333]

should explain more I said is send differently
in energies you can see that the male part of the soul has the ability to send energy treads or cords . they are used as energy channels
while the other part where sound or images are concerned are more holistic and do not cord but are a far more direct thing , they also can not steal energy
male energy language constructs create cords that can steal energy sound does not , if a music energy overlap between souls is a fact we like the same
how ever music from an other can also be rejected to prevent an overlap or liking of the same, same goes for smells and images

[firstandlast]

Originally Posted by SecretDreams333

hi the problem seem to be in the use of written language spoken is sound
so is send differently
think of those that would want to have a bible followed to the letter
why ? to me it looks like that it is as if a set of lines is drawn in a hologram
in each participants mind
the lines are the written text remembered as images
this pattern is shared in this way so it has to be the same for the match in sharing to be the best
the better the match the better shared , the more same energy is shared
the stronger the shared feeling
and this is perceived as a shared truth or as THE TRUTH
that's how a human soul can work
sounds are also collective shared and images to but they are the female energy part of the mind
the written language lines thing in the male
so the male energy wants to rule as reality over the female
and does it in that way
look around it happens when written text in books is so used , shared among followers
girls get the blame while both energies are found each one

This is exactly why people get lost in the labyrinth, because they are explaining the forms through cause and effect (that is through something other than spirit) instead of seeing the spirit of the forms-- If looked upon why we would express ourselves that way, than anything sinister cannot be complete but only be a part--

Why is the whole being expressing itself like this? now if we insist that the whole being is against itself somehow, obviously we have come across a fracture perspective, and exist in a fractured mentality is a consequence-- Because every perspective is real and has consequences upon the whole, but the consequence is only to the degree that it is true and resonates with the whole--

Every aspect of viewpoint is redeemable, but unless you see yourself as an extension of a greater spirit, than you are simply trying to explain yourself as a formation within the spirit, and that will only get you as far as it appears to have taken you.. the truth is the pass of liberation itself, the answer is in the question, it is self evident; but not only evidence of itself for there is much to spirit, more than form can express alone, but that there is nothing beyond form there is simply more to form than we perceive at any given angle--

However I like the way this one walks upon the waters, it is just that I am in a certain position; and you in another-- This has consequences to the highest degree possible--