Osaid

Right. It can definitely spawn an investigation. Because it is so pertinent for the seeker. But the resolution always seems to be "doh, it was just a belief".

Sounds like you're opening the closet and realizing that nothing is in there.

It makes sense that the finite would be concerned with what happens after the finite disappears. Like paper being concerned about scissors. But that's the belief in finite. What about what isn't disappearing, which isn't finite and isn't a belief? Death seems to be spiritual because it looks supernatural and mysterious by virtue of being unknown, but it's a distraction from what actually exists.

Right Everyone is so macabre.

It's almost like hatred, envy, and narcissism isn't actually inherent to either gender (contrary to all the posts in this section of the forum) 🤔🤔🤔

Haha, nope. I wasn't lying when I said it was ineffable. As an analogy, there is seeing, and then there are the objects we see. It's easy to get entangled in all the different objects, to the point where one might even ask "which object am I?". The kicker is that seeing itself is never any of the objects and never was. You can say that you're seeing a table and a chair, but you can never say that seeing is a table or a chair.

Well, if you take away the "your" and the "my", then it's the same "this". So, in the end, it's not this that's ever different, it's your idea of what you are that differs from this.

Maybe. I know what nouns and verbs are, but I thought the decision to bring those distinctions into a talk like this was interesting on Osho's part.

I thought there was something strange about that statement. It's AI lol.

Very interesting distinction to make, I kinda like it.

Osho's elaboration, basically. I gotta steelman him or he'll roll in his grave.

I see, well I was mostly just joking.

Seemed like you wanted someone to argue with.

Very cool. Unfortunately, I have nothing to argue about with you.

What about when you're trying to fall asleep? Same deal?