It's time to wake up!

a reply to: daskakik
Will you verify what you mean when you say 'I realized that I am not my thoughts' by simply answering these questions please:

Is it recognized that thoughts are not done by you?
Is it recognized that the thoughts that appear do not speak about you?
Is it recognized that they are not 'your' thoughts?

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
So you realized that you are not your thoughts? I am not sure what that actually means, can you verify by simply answering these questions please:

No, you being sure is not required.

For there to be a honest discussion clarity is required - you have stated time and time again that you understand what is being spoken about so why not just answer the simple questions? This is after all a discussion forum.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Itisnowagain
You are another one who can't accept that someone understands yet disagrees.

How could it be accepted that 'someone' understands if 'someone' is so evasive?

Exactly, daskakik has been very evasive and not transparent. When one asks him for clarity he usually just keeps it his own way and avoids giving his own views saying it doesn't matter. But his knowledge on this matters because that's what this whole conversation was about mostly. The illusion of self. But I doubt he knows what we really mean although he has been insisting he does. He doesn't seem to at all.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
For there to be a honest discussion clarity is required - you have stated time and time again that you understand what is being spoken about so why not just answer the simple questions? This is after all a discussion forum.

Already did. I'm not willing to elaborate because you will probably not accept it unless I agree with you.

How could it be accepted that 'someone' understands if 'someone' is so evasive?

I'm not being evasive, I am in disagreement.

You post cryptic strings of text as well and expect others to decipher them. What's good for the goose...

originally posted by: Andy1144
He doesn't seem to at all.

Fine, that doesn't change anything. It's just your opinion.

a reply to: daskakik

Already did. I'm not willing to elaborate because you will probably not accept it unless I agree with you.

No you didn't.
This is just another cop out.

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: vethumanbeing

Become the best me i can be? Yes it takes a lot of effort, unfortunately i am lazy...
Just kidding. Who knows maybe it is some trauma that makes people dull, ie avoiding all participation and responsibility? Or the opposite, a classical wealthy westerners adaption of the indian caste system?

Hindus and Buddhists bypass this; 200 monopoly dollars PASS GO; as are existing in a Karmic Wheel existence they accept as never ending heartbreak (no chance to use ones individual EGO to make a difference in their lives as do not acknowledge this as anything other than self aggrandizement). The Western system (understanding) of Eastern would be this interpretation: IT's US VS THEM with some philanthropy thrown in to help what is perceived "the third world". What the west does not comprehend is this: Its a life style chosen based upon a religious system (a crushing DOGMA no one of this belief can apparently escape those clutches).

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
This is just another cop out.

Maybe not to your liking but, I'm not here to please you.

originally posted by: daskakik
originally posted by: Itisnowagain

Itisnowagain:This is just another cop out.

daskakik: Maybe not to your liking but, I'm not here to please you.

This is true you are both here to please me.

a reply to: daskakik

When aked to discuss your views more specifically, you avoid giving a direct more detailed answer, continue remaining vague, and when confronted with the facts, all you say is "it's your opinion, I am not here to answer peoples questions just to please them". When that's obviously not the case.
Instead of accusing us of just giving our opinions, why not just discuss the logic behind the opinions. Discuss why you think your opinion is valid, and not just stop at "It's just your opinion".

And stop lying to us when you say you know and did explain what you mean by self inquiry. Be vulnerable for once, and answer itisnowagain's questions. That's what this conversation is about, the illusion of self and it's implications. And we can't have a good discussion if you avoid giving your views on by you think your opinion is more logical then ours.

You are correct when you say, it's just our view of things, but you stop there and don't discuss why you think we are wrong. You will claim you did, but not well enough. You only go as far as, it's your opinion, and seem to twist things to go according to your own liking. The same thing you've accused me of. Stop red herring.

Maybe not to your liking but, I'm not here to please you.

That's equivalent to an athiest asking a christian for good evidence for the existence of god. And when the christian is told that his reasons are a cop out, he replies, "I am not here to please you". Do you see what's wrong with that?

originally posted by: daskakik
I'm not willing to elaborate because you will probably not accept it unless I agree with you.

Answers written will be read - what I am cannot reject - I am the unconditional space which allows (accepts) all that is to arise.
Does it really matter if I agree with you? Are you not man enough to receive critique? You seem to be very happy to give it!

And why would you assume that I will not agree with your answers?

Maybe not to your liking but, I'm not here to please you.

Oh I am very pleased - you have indeed answered the questions!
If you understood the statement you made you would have no trouble in answering the questions posed.

The realiziation that I am not my thoughts and the loss of importance that these had.

But you didn't so this says it all.
Thank you for clearing this up.

a reply to: EternalFire
Here is a great discussion on how life is a dream - it cannot be proved that this 'waking state' is any different from a dream.
What if there is no one to wake up?

originally posted by: Andy1144
And stop lying to us when you say you know and did explain what you mean by self inquiry.

I'm not lying but I am not going to convince you unless I tell you what you want to hear. 60+ pages of this thread are proof of that.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
Answers written will be read - what I am cannot reject - I am the unconditional space which allows (accepts) all that is to arise.
Does it really matter if I agree with you? Are you not man enough to receive critique? You seem to be very happy to give it!

I already know you disagree and there is no need to discuss it. It isn't because I can't recieve critique. Going through it is just pointless.

And why would you assume that I will not agree with your answers?

We have discussed similar topics before.

Oh I am very pleased

- you have indeed answered the questions!
If you understood the statement you made you would have no trouble in answering the questions posed.

No, but if it is what you need go ahead and think that.

a reply to: [post=20087405]daskakik[/

I'm not lying but I am not going to convince you unless I tell you what you want to hear. 60+ pages of this thread are proof of that.

No, I am open to new ideas if one is willing to discuss them. But you aren't. You couldn't even answer his/her simple questions for the advancement of the discussion. You may not think it is necessary but discussing but we believe is important in having a clear conversation. 60+ pages really are proof of this.

originally posted by: Andy1144
but we believe is important in having a clear conversation. 60+ pages really are proof of this.

You are free to believe whatever you want. In the end it's just an opinion. I already said that discussion on the level you want is not my point.

The advancement of the discussion is pointless. I have discussed this with itisnowagain a number of times during the past years. Nothing advances because he is stuck in his circular logic. I'm done trying to point it out.

You have done the same thing in this thread. You can't argue the point with someone stuck in a circular logic fallacy beause to them it makes perfect sense.

a reply to: daskakik

But isn't avoiding to advance the discussion rather fruitless? We haven't really learned much in 60 pages because of this. I think we would've learned much more if we discussed our points and understandings. Maybe to me it makes perfect sense but as I said, I am open to being wrong if you provide sufficient evidence, which you've failed to do because you aren't answering questions.

a reply to: Andy1144
Itsnowagain is guilty of the same; obtuseness/stubborn reasoning; by both and is all ego driven.

originally posted by: Andy1144
But isn't avoiding to advance the discussion rather fruitless?

It's fruitless either way if advanciong it means agreeing to your circular logic.

We haven't really learned much in 60 pages because of this. I think we would've learned much more if we discussed our points and understandings.

No, it would just be baseless opinions.

Maybe to me it makes perfect sense but as I said, I am open to being wrong if you provide sufficient evidence, which you've failed to do because you aren't answering questions.

Answering those questions has nothing to do with the points I have brought up. That is a strawman argument.

You can say you are open to being wrong but your posts say otherwise.

a reply to: daskakik
Its an unfair attack; I see your reasoning. These are very esoteric abstract concepts. These are ideas needed more to be *listened* to rather then be blanketed and thrown in the dustbin.

a reply to: daskakik

It's fruitless either way if advanciong it means agreeing to your circular logic.

I am not asking you to agree with me but be open to the possibility that I am right and argue my claims using your own points. But you haven't done that.

No, it would just be baseless opinions.

What is not a baseless opinion to you? If something has good logic behind it then it is worth considering. Now you are right that logic can seem true to oneself, but that's why it's about discussing the logic with each other.

Answering those questions has nothing to do with the points I have brought up.

Same here, and you are right. They don't deal with your points directly. I am saying take a peak beyond the points you've given and actually start discussing points. Maybe then we'll learn something after all this time.
It is someones fault we haven't been progressing at all. And if you've kept things in circular logic like you've done, then no wonder.
I am saying, stop making the same points and discuss something new. It wasn't very helpful until now.