WARNING: IF YOU ARE A DEVOUT BELEIVER IN ANY RELIGION THAT THINKS THAT THEY KNOW THAT THERE IS A GOD, OR THAT THEY KNOW THAT WHAT THEY KNOW THEY KNOW, THEN YOU WILL NOT LIKE TO READ THIS. DO NOT READ THIS IF YOU DO NOT HAVE AN OPEN MIND TO NEW IDEAS ON SUBJECTS. THIS IS THE ULTIMATE PARADOX...

It will become confusing at times, and It may get mixed up and change topic randomly, but it will all go together, if you take what you learn, and put it to use, you will become you. Just think...



I have, for the past 7 years, thought, with help of ideas of others, and made major realizations on the being of everything. This is not restricted to our planet, or to the universe. It applies to anything that is. This document comes to no end, no truth. It merely concludes that you should never take anything for true, whether it be that there is a single god, or that you are actually sitting where you are sitting. READ:

I will start and build up, so that anyone who reads this, and reads with an open mind, will understand. You start with the understanding of science. Whether you have graduated college with a degree in science, or are still in your high school biology class, you know that science applies to "everything" and that if something is, then it can be explained by science, one way or another. We go back to the days known as "Before Christ". There was a man who knew without a truth to base all truths on, and then we could never use anything as true. This man found something that he knew was true. This truth, "I think, Therefore I am", is the only truth that we comprehend at all, though we only are able to put into words a minute bit of what we are able to think, throughout our whole lifetime, into words. Words, which we know to be words because we have come to the idea that we are us, we have a body, brain, and vocal chords to be able to make these words. But until we are able to have such an understanding of what is, that we are able to communicate, not through words, but thought. And when you think of thought, you think of the actions taking place in your brain that you have come to think as what you cause you to think, and this is what you think because you are not able to comprehend anything more, yet. But you are not you, and I am not me. There are infinite possibilities of what we really are, other than the fact that we are. We are what we are because this is what all believe, and it works. But whatever we would think, would work as long as it went along with "We think, therefore we are". If we were to believe something so much that we believed nothing more, then that believe would come to be as real as the hands you are using to control your mouse and keyboard. There is nothing that made this universe, except for we, for we believed so much that this is the universe, that it is the only thing that could become true to us. For example, try to remember something you thought as a child, before you were able to comprehend the fact that this is what is, and what you see, feel, smell, taste, is. This age would be somewhere between 2 and 5. Try to think of a single thought from then. It won’t work. You sit here thinking "this is because I was not old enough to be able to think like this", but since you cannot think of a thought from then, it is probable that you cannot create an image of anything from then either. This is because then, you knew thought as what it is, and slowly, you collected thoughts from other people, and over time came to a belief that nothing else is true other than the fact that what we see everyday is there, and has to be there. You see, feel, taste, smell, and hear things everyday, but do you know for a fact that you are really doing all these things? You think you know, but most likely you are either very hardheaded, or you do not like to think for yourself. There are a select few of people who will read this who will be open to the fact that they are not really doing any of these things, but believe that they are so strongly, that you cannot believe anything else. Even if someone were to wipe out all thought of all beliefs, to themselves, everything would seem as it really is, but to us, that person would be accepted as crazy, or as some kind of phenomenon. This person would have the ability to do anything, because they would not be restricted to what we believe as laws of physics. Examples of people who have done this are Buddha, and Jesus Christ. Buddha spent many years meditating, erasing his all beliefs. He did this, and understood that to pass this on; he would have to appeal to us to abide by laws of physics. His word was passed, and because of this, I am able to sit here and write this document. Jesus Christ, who is written in the Christian bible as being the son of "god", and was not born by reproduction, but by the whim of "god". I believe this is not true, but he was came about the same way all people do, and merely during the many undocumented years of his lifetime, did the same thing that Buddha did. He came back, and used his unrestricted thoughts to try to help people understand what he understood. The problem with this is that he would have to communicate this by words, and this cannot be communicated by any language, but must be passed by thought. He went on knowing this, and spent his time helping people in other ways. These are his "miracles". He died, and his body "disappeared". It is possible that there have been many other cases of people who have done this, but knew from the beginning that they could not pass it to other people, and merely disappeared.

Life is not life, death is not death. In the minutes, or mere seconds before death, people either forget everything that they have ever believed, knowing that they will die and that there is no reason to believe any of this, and these people go to what we say is heaven, but is really what would be known as reality.

So what we know, we do not know. We only believe we know, and we believe we know so strongly that it becomes true to us. It is true that what we know is true, but the only way to really know something is to believe you know it so strongly that it becomes true. But the only real truth is that thought is all we are, and thought is all everything is. Without the belief that thought is not all that everything is, is reality. So think on this, and if you understand, comprehend, and believe so strongly that you believe that the only truth is that we think therefore we are, then what we really are is revealed to you, and you will see everything as it really is, and will know. If you see this, and believe again that the things you believe now are true, then you will forget what you knew before, and will be reborn as a child, because we will know you only as a reborn believer of what we believe. Believe nothing...

If you decide to respond to this, please respond with an open mind, and try to keep the posts that bitch about the fact that this says that science, math, and religion is false. And keep the flames in the topics that actually deserve them...

(THIS IS AN ORIGNAL DOCUMENT, NOT IDEA, AND I HOPE THAT YOU HAVE THE HONOR TO KEEP IT TO ITS ORIGNAL WRITER, NOT TO STEAL IT, AND KNOW THAT I WROTE IT)

(ANY REFERENCES TO RELIGIOUS FIGURES WERE NOT USED TO CRITISIZE, MERELY TO EXPLAIN MY POINT, SO PLEASE DO NOT TAKE OFFENSE)

[This message has been edited by Drewparker1230 (edited 03-27-2004).]

you describe a very uncommon and profound perception of reality. very interesting stuff, and well stated considering the abstract nature of the paradox you're describing. however, before you pat yourself on the back too much, examine this idea further. don't come to any philosophical/spiritual conclusion on it, or you'll be the one with a closed mind. i'm sorry to tell you, it's not a completely original philosophical idea. there have even been similar threads on totse in the past... they usually just break down into a battle of egos. so you should feel proud, but be smart and keep it all in perspective.

btw, thanks for sharing that.

[This message has been edited by Eil (edited 03-27-2004).]

written to explain "we think, therefore we are". will remove original idea implications.



BTW: i tried to keep as open minded while also explaining my point. its like when u hear people say anythings possible, so belive nothing, if u have ever heard that.

[This message has been edited by Drewparker1230 (edited 03-27-2004).]

thank you for this.

this is where crowley was trying to get, that your true will can change the world, that perception is your mind, and our minds work together, so you can change whatever you want. your mind makes it real. yeah, theres phisical laws, and things like that, but your mind makes them real. you made them up. crowley was just too busy drinking cum and getting rich off his books to remember to tell people this before he died.

jesus did the same thing, only he used his ability to woo and awe people into being "better" people. (if someone can bring people back from the dead, then hell, we should listen to what he says!) which is spiritual terrorism, but it would be fine if people after him didnt fuck it up with dogma and other shit.

ever had a dream, and you were conscious near the end of it, and could control what happened. this is the only reason why i sleep, to have the 1/100 chance to have a dream where i wake up before the dream ends, then i am god.

who said life isnt a dream?

--GREAT POST, I BASE ALMSOT EVERYTIHNG ON THIS BELIEF. ALL YOU SAID IS TRUTH, ITS FACTS.--

i wish some more people would read this... seems like noone on here is at all intelligent...

That is a very interesting conclusion. It could very well be true, but if nothing is true then that isn't either.

It is a good idea, but hardly a way to live or even to contemplate too hard on, because isn't it pointless? After you come to the conclusion of what you believe life or death or anything for that matter is... what do you do with it? Wait to die and see if you're right?

Not a flame, just the questions that came into my head.

I'll think about it some more when I'm not inebriated http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif)

many people reach conclusions such as yours, but are unable to express them effectivley in words.

very good essay type thing, and it does make the mind come to conclusions about religon. i sent this to a friend and they finally listened to my ideas...

thank you and write more like this

Alright. Thank you for the good posts. Just to let you guys know, i am probably alot younger than you think from reading this, but i am going to answer the questions that were asked.

Shareme:It is not that it is true. The document states that the only thing that ever can be stated as true, is the fact that very well known phrase, "I think, therefore I am", thus "That is a very interesting conclusion. It could very well be true, but if nothing is true then that isn't either"(posted by you), is an unnessesary comment. The idea that it is pointless has nothing to do with it. It is the idea that you should never take anything to be true, or waste time in life, and live it as well as you can. The conclusion is merely to more advance the human races' intelligence and the human race itself, till one day, when the whole race is able to understand, comprehend, and belive only that one famous phrase, then we will be a godly race. We will be more advanced than any other race in the universe, have complete control over the whole universe, and have complete knowlidge of the unvirse, thus completing our goal as beings. The idea is to not die, but to do as i stated in the document and realize the single truth, and belive only that one truth, so that you can become the real you, and have the godly abilities. That is what this is, and that is what can be done.

I am glad that the others of you to read this understand, and respect what i have written. that is the kind of response i was hoping for, but did not fully expect from totse, since this forum is full of people who i would not expect to read this with full understanding, and with open mindedness. Thank You.

i was also wondering if i should try to get this put in the archives... if you think so please send me an aim message, my sn is: rekrapbwerd

[This message has been edited by Drewparker1230 (edited 03-29-2004).]

Drewparker

Your saying that "I think, therefore I am" is the only truth, but that's not why the saying is well known. The saying became well known by that the fact that he "thinks" is the only undeniable proof of the truth of his existence. The fact that you "think" is the only truth that proves you exist.

But there are other truths that exist, truths such as "there is no such thing as nothing" or "Everything exists (even if it's an illusion. Illusions exists.)". These are 2 more undeniable truths that bring us closer to understanding.



[This message has been edited by ---Beany--- (edited 03-29-2004).]

*Warning n00b post*

Interesting thread and I'm impressed that it's not (so far) turned into the usual bonfire that is a totse thread containing

an opinion :) But maybe that's because everyone's agreed with 'Drewparker1230'?

I want to question your idea of 'I think, therefore I am', famously proposed by Rene Descartes as 'Cogito ergo sum' right?

(On a slightly nit-picky note Descartes was born "After Christ" in 1596, that is of course if it's him your refering to).

Now you say that 'I think therefore I am' is "the only truth that we comprehend at all" and of course Descartes was tryin

to find a foundational truth when he formulated his Cogito, but I disagree with it's inherent truth. I think that the Cogito makes a number of assumptions, that number being 3:

1- It assumes and individuality, the 'I'.

2- It assumes the truth holding ability of language, which I guess your theory gets around intact.

3- It assumes that memory is generally acceptable.

Now the rest of your post seems to come from what I would call an advanced form of 'Cartesian Doubt', you know doubting

everything to find truth at the end of the doubt. You seem to have doubted everything to the point that only a positive

belief can be true and that it is true just because it is held to be certain.

It seems to be that your idea hinges on this sort ambigous belief has some sort of creative force up the point of being

reality itself, a sort of mass-solipsism where solipsism becomes a valid theory (as oppsed to the unbalanced mentality it's

currently seen as). Now your basing this on the Cogito doesn't, to me, give your theory any extra weight and it seems to me

that without any fundamental truth you seem to have ended up with just a concept of subjective reality based upon mass

belief. Subjectivity doesn't especially appeal to me I'm afraid, especially subjectivity with this kind of power, it seems incomprehensible to rationale that what you believe to be true is, but overall it's a very interesting theory despite some

logical holes. :)

I'll end by saying that doubt on this sort of scale inevitably has no conclusion there's always something to doubt be it,

other peoples existance the existance of yourself as you percieve etc. etc.

(I apologise if this isn't very coherent, it's been a while since I wrote anything intellectual. :D )

/\|_|*|-|/\

Are we something identifiable, only because we posses senses that can be artificially induced through drugs?

We experience senses, but does that make us? We also experience feelings and emotions, does this make us? We form arbitrary contracts of convenience with cash, does this make us? Or are we merly our appearance?

Perhaps what we are, is what is reflected of our personal experiences. In other words, when we experience something beautiful, the image(wether it's sex, seeing a sunset, or even having a good conversation)is an illusion, but the beauty is real, because it is something that we have manifested and reflected from our true selves.

quote:Originally posted by ilbastardoh:

Perhaps what we are, is what is reflected of our personal experiences. In other words, when we experience something beautiful, the image(wether it's sex, seeing a sunset, or even having a good conversation)is an illusion, but the beauty is real, because it is something that we have manifested and reflected from our true selves.



Ch'ching!

So like everything you experience whether good or bad is a manifestation of yourself. Everything you experience is a perfect expression of your current state of consciousness.

The yogis masters universe is only good, pure and full of love.

I'm going to accept an arguement on 'Cogito ergo sum.'

1. Whether we have a collective consciousness or not matters little with the concept of cogito ergo sum. Even if we are a part of a whole, we are still individual parts of that whole, and our ability to think, to even experience illusions and false senses is undeniable proof that we exist on some level. Whether life is a dream, and illusion, or a hologram; we must exist on some plane to simply experience the dream, illusion, or hologram. If we did not exist, we could not think, nor doubt. The two undeniable proofs of self are Cogito ergo sum, and Dubito (sp?) ergo sum. If we can think, and if we can doubt what we think, then we most certainly exist, otherwise there would be no way to experience even a fake life.

2. It doesn't assume the truth holding of language...the statement 'dubito ergo sum' in combination with 'cogito ergo sum' claims that everyone we experience is doubtable, and the mere ability to even falsely experience thought or doubt proves we exist.

3. I am wondering what you mean by this? How does it imply that memory is accepted? It implies that thought, whether real or false, is proof of existence on some plane or another. Never does it give importance to memory (though the ability to think about memories, false or true, does prove existence, but does not claim memories to be true.)

I am VERY much looking forward to a reply...interesting topic in my opinion http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif) Though you may just exist in my mind...and I may just be argueing with another part of my consciousness, hehe.

quote:Originally posted by AlphA:

[b]*Warning n00b post*

Interesting thread and I'm impressed that it's not (so far) turned into the usual bonfire that is a totse thread containing

an opinion http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif) But maybe that's because everyone's agreed with 'Drewparker1230'?

I want to question your idea of 'I think, therefore I am', famously proposed by Rene Descartes as 'Cogito ergo sum' right?

(On a slightly nit-picky note Descartes was born "After Christ" in 1596, that is of course if it's him your refering to).

Now you say that 'I think therefore I am' is "the only truth that we comprehend at all" and of course Descartes was tryin

to find a foundational truth when he formulated his Cogito, but I disagree with it's inherent truth. I think that the Cogito makes a number of assumptions, that number being 3:

1- It assumes and individuality, the 'I'.

2- It assumes the truth holding ability of language, which I guess your theory gets around intact.

3- It assumes that memory is generally acceptable.

Now the rest of your post seems to come from what I would call an advanced form of 'Cartesian Doubt', you know doubting

everything to find truth at the end of the doubt. You seem to have doubted everything to the point that only a positive

belief can be true and that it is true just because it is held to be certain.

It seems to be that your idea hinges on this sort ambigous belief has some sort of creative force up the point of being

reality itself, a sort of mass-solipsism where solipsism becomes a valid theory (as oppsed to the unbalanced mentality it's

currently seen as). Now your basing this on the Cogito doesn't, to me, give your theory any extra weight and it seems to me

that without any fundamental truth you seem to have ended up with just a concept of subjective reality based upon mass

belief. Subjectivity doesn't especially appeal to me I'm afraid, especially subjectivity with this kind of power, it seems incomprehensible to rationale that what you believe to be true is, but overall it's a very interesting theory despite some

logical holes. http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

I'll end by saying that doubt on this sort of scale inevitably has no conclusion there's always something to doubt be it,

other peoples existance the existance of yourself as you percieve etc. etc.

(I apologise if this isn't very coherent, it's been a while since I wrote anything intellectual. http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif) )

/\|_|*|-|/\

ok here goes...



Beany. Those other truths that you stated, would not be true were it not for the first one, the others would not be true. If we did not think, then we would not exist, and then nothing would exist, because we would not exist, thus nothing would exist, and there would be nothing, because without thought, there is nothing.

[BP]AlphA. You have enlightened me on the fact that Rene Descartes is the one who was the first person to become famous for that phrase, possibly because he was the first to bring it to words, or he was the first to have written it. The I in that phrase, is very important. I think, therefore I am. If i didnt think, if you, being i to yourself, did not think, then there would be nothing, just as i said to beanie. Imagine this. If you did not think, then nothing would be, because for something to be, you have to think about it, and if u never think about something, then it is not there, because if u dont know about it, or do not think about it, how can it be there? I is the inevitable truth that I may be the only real thing, and all of you are such detailed thoughts, that i am able to control everything that you do, but i do not know what you are doing, and therefore how do i know that you are doing anything? To your second thought, if we were able to communicate without language, then i would not have needed to write that, because it would be known to everyone, and that is the only way, therefore, me writing this, and descartes writing it, is the only way for anybody else to know about it, but is not easy at that, and cannot get the whole idea through, thus i had to put things in there to spark that imagination that leads to the understanding of that phrase by rene. Logic is no part of this. Logic is something that is what brings us to belive that what we see is real. this should be seen easily when reading what i wrote, but maybe not to everyone. Doubt is not a factor, it that you not doubt everything, but belive only one thing.

Ilbastardoh. Exactly.

Hexadecimal. Never did i say that we do not exist, but that we do not exist as we know ourselves. Reread. Memory is another one of those things that are made up, and are thought about only when brought upon ourselves, and the thought is thought as only as we think of it at the moment of thought, so when you remember something, you are mereley thinking about something new, similar to something that you have thought about in the past, just like when u find an old newspaper, how do u know that that is what the newspaper has always said? anything you try to do to find out if that is what it has always said can be easily seen as a thought being remade at the time of seeing this paper.

thank you all and i hope to have more critisizm as this. very interesting i find this to be.

Drew, I was replying to Alpha and his criticism of Cogito Ergo Sum...had nothing to do with your post at all.

oh sorry... a little buzzin when i did that so couldnt tell the difference lol.

To be honest, Drew, this revelation/conclusion you have expressed is very much like what I have come to understand of reality. The inherent problem with the realization is the nihilistic trend it can induce. It takes great strength of character to apply the realization constructively to your existence rather than allow it to become a burdon upon your consciousness. I am glad to see you have put so much thought into it, and your angle on Christ was a welcome new idea to look at and enjoy.

If you have the time and desire, please feel free to look back at some of my old posts/replies in this forum for other angles on this and similar themes which I have at times discussed. Your input/critique of any of my posts is welcome.

Good to see another seeker walking down the path of power and responsibility. If you ever need an ear to listen, or an eye to read, I'll try to be there for you. If you ever have any new revelations to share with the rest of us, I shall eagerly seek them out to absorb.

-=CW=-

submit this to the totse archive!! seriously something like this needs a permenant home i bet you figured this out when u were sittin on the toilet.thats where i do my best thinkin too http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif)

This is good.

Though I think you should have taken "I think therefore I am" back a little further,

"I am that I am"

Or simply

"I Am"

What you need to find is the source of this. Before we think what is? Does it exist, or doesn't it?

You can exist without thinking. Simple basic awareness, just like a window. Or less.

We have to be to think, to see what we're thinking. Which sounds like the same thing, only I'm discibing it in a different way, but I think it has slightly differnt implication and applications, directions?

"We are what we think. All that we are arises with our thoughts. With our thoughts we create the world-" Buddha



Ps. You may, and I stress may, like the writing of Paramahansa Yogananda. Those where he talks of the same thing as you've written, through professes (atleast subtely) that he has direct knowledge and experience of these things, but don't beleive the stuff about His "Incorruatably Bodies-After Death" if you come across that, which starts the 'may.' Sigh, but I must note, that was His disciples doing and not his own.

It sucks when you find out somebody has stole your thoughts.

Keep it up/

i would like to submit this to the archives, but do not know how and do not feel like looking through the archives. i did submit it to "WIRED", and hopefully they will accept it.

Right so here's my responses to whats been posted:

Hexadecimal:

"to even experience illusions and false senses is undeniable proof that we exist on some level"

"If we did not exist, we could not think, nor doubt"

I agree with you that the mere existence of an illusion of reality would mean that there is "something" out there, be it a

falsification or not. Though my point was that individuality is not proven by the Cogito, it is merely assumed, perhaps "I"

is merely a falsification, maybe you've been "programmed" to tell yourself that you think for yourself? Now to me that would not equal a true individuality, which by the 'Cartesian doubt' method of philosophy would mean it should be scrapped in order to find a/the foundational truth.

Hexadecimal:

"How does it imply that memory is accepted?"

How do you know that you just thought? You remember it. Without memory you cannot know anything for certain unless your thinking of it and the reasoning behind you belief in it every single moment. It's more a criticism that arises from Descartes method of doubting everything: Descartes never doubts that he could have just been created with supposed memories, which would put paid to any prior reasoning based on experience which brings you back to having to know everything including its reasoning every single moment.

Drewparker1230:

"If you did not think, then nothing would be, because for something to be, you have to think about it, and if u never think

about something, then it is not there, because if u dont know about it, or do not think about it, how can it be there?"

But what if someone else was thinking it? This brings me on to a point about other minds. How do we know they exist? If there

are supposedly thoughts that I seem to experience what is to say that other people experience similar thoughts? What's not

to say that only my consciousness exists and only I have thoughts (everything else just presumably having the illusion of

thoughts).

Also, under your theory of belief making reality: what would be stopping me from believing that you do not exist?

Therefore making you cease to exist?

Evolove:

"You can exist without thinking"

But you couldn't know that you (or anything) existed without having consciousness.

Evolove:

Though I think you should have taken "I think therefore I am" back a little further,

"I am that I am"

Or simply

"I Am"

What purpose does this reduction serve? Please expand :) Though I'm afraid your not the first person to say that, hehehe

"God said to Moses, "I am who I am. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'I AM has sent me to you.'""

Exodus 3:14. Though with God I think He's making the point that he is indescribable and also I think He is saying that He is

existance itself.

Evolove:

"We are what we think. All that we are arises with our thoughts. With our thoughts we create the world-" Buddha

Maybe Drewparker1230, should read more Bhuddhism :)

Mindnumbinglyinteresting:

"i bet you figured this out when u were sittin on the toilet.thats where i do my best thinkin too :D"

Gotta agree with that one, lal!

Also Drewparker1230 another question that dawned on me while I was writing this: What about sleep? Do beliefs stop existing when we sleep? If so where are they stored to start existing when we awake? Does this mean we have a 'soul'? If so please share your ideas about it.

/\|_|*|-|/\

Very interesting.... If you haven't already read these, I think these totse articles might be of interest to you:

Beautiful Dreams and Horrible Nights Part 1: http://www.totse.com/en/fringe/dreams_auras_astral_projection/themindcapable169201.html

Beautiful Dreams and Horrible Nights Part 2: http://www.totse.com/en/fringe/dreams_auras_astral_projection/beautifuldream169421.html

very abstract crowley-esque

You reality in essence is perspective coincides with i think theredore i am which means i presume i exist so therefore for all my intents and purposes i exist

The stuff you said is basicly the beginings of chaos though do not be confined in your own realm of though for that is in itself a form of servitude

^^ re-read what this guy said... several times if necessary. he hit it on the nose.

--------

Evolove:

"You can exist without thinking"

But you couldn't know that you (or anything) existed without having consciousness.

Evolove:

Though I think you should have taken "I think therefore I am" back a little further,

"I am that I am"

Or simply

"I Am"

What purpose does this reduction serve? Please expand http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif) Though I'm afraid your not the first person to say that, hehehe

"God said to Moses, "I am who I am. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'I AM has sent me to you.'""

Exodus 3:14. Though with God I think He's making the point that he is indescribable and also I think He is saying that He is

existance itself.

----------

Being conscious doesn't nessecarily imply thought, or at least the kind of thought, is deductive logic the right word?, that the phrase "I think therefore I am" requires.

"Though with God I think He's making the point that he is indescribable and also I think He is saying that He is

existance itself." <YES

This is the kind of awareness I'm speaking of. That is the perpose of the reduction. If you go backwards through the levels of consciousness you will eventualy come to a piont known as Nirvana. In this state there is no thought, but in every other there is waves of varring degree and substance in the mind.

I know my quotes were Biblical, the last one was referencing Jesus, "Before Abraham was I AM"

I'm just thinking now the best way to discribe the tought I'm talking of, where you are aware and know this, and can know other things, but is not so much like thinking but rather more like breathing? Perhaps? I don't know how to correctly discribe it, I guess you'll have to embrace your right brain.

quote:Originally posted by Drewparker1230:

WARNING: IF YOU ARE A DEVOUT BELEIVER IN ANY RELIGION THAT THINKS THAT THEY KNOW THAT THERE IS A GOD, OR THAT THEY KNOW THAT WHAT THEY KNOW THEY KNOW, THEN YOU WILL NOT LIKE TO READ THIS. DO NOT READ THIS IF YOU DO NOT HAVE AN OPEN MIND TO NEW IDEAS ON SUBJECTS. THIS IS THE ULTIMATE PARADOX...

Drew,... I have an open mind, and I also don't have an open mind. I too have found a way to explain everything, and explain nothing too, and I think it is going the same way you are going with your ideas. I didn't read everything, because I no longer stick with things once they no longer help me help me along the path I am already on.

Your idea, am I right, is based on the idea that we are individuals and have individual ideas. Is that fair? My idea (not mine really) is based on the proposition that there is a truth out there that comes from no location or being, and can be strived for through words, but cannot be completely described with words/thoughts.

I agree with what you are saying, but also disagree somewhat, or would try to refine it some with you, because your foundation idea might be that it is established that a person thinks, or that there are thoughts. But there is a thought that attempts to describe something more basic, and more true than the idea that there are thoughts. This something exists without existing, and thinks without thinking, and is both zero and infinite.

The thoughts that point to "it" are:::::::::::::the only absolute truth is that there are no other absolute truths; that all other questions have more than one correct answer; that everything else is true and not true; every other question has a yes and a no answer.

Notice that this does not say there is no answer or no truth, but that there is only one. It has many names, but it is only one.

I notice that the world is going to this idea at an increasing speed. The closer we get, it seems like the further away we are, which is true (and not true).

I think this is the simplest, most complicated idea, that can be expressed.

Do you think any of this is similar to what you are saying? What is your yes answer? And what is your no answer?

Do you have any other truth that cannot be found to have another point of view that it can be looked at from?

I am sorry that I cannot expound on this at extreme length. I always fail in the area of being a skillful communicator, and usually end up being too blunt. If I were painting a picture it would just be a stick figure, I guess.

bkc

[This message has been edited by bkc (edited 04-02-2004).]

Objective Truth remains the same regardless of how many relative perspectives you can find for it.

quote:Originally posted by Drewparker1230:

"I think, Therefore I am"

"The colors of the mind, excited by a flower or the moon should not be seen as self at all, but we think of them as our self."

- Dogen, from Shobogenzo chapter 91 (Yui Butsu Yo Butsu "Buddhas Alone Together With Buddhas")

Assuming your theory is correct, and that nothing truely exists as it is, then time cannot exist but as a perception and since it is only a perception, albeit one so strongly rooted that it is almost impossible to desrtoy, if one ignores time, then it does not affect you as perceoptions only have an affect if acted upon and utilised.

~Mors

See "End of Time" by ....somebody whose name I've forgotten

Edit: Julian Barbour

[This message has been edited by evolove (edited 04-06-2004).]

quote:Originally posted by inquisitor_11:

Objective Truth remains the same regardless of how many relative perspectives you can find for it.

For example?

I have submitted this as an article, hopefully it will be submitted. Thanks for all the feedback and keep it coming http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)