Someone here

The whole cannot be known by it's parts... yet the parts are known by the whole. Science always relies on Proofs. How to go about proving the above facts? A part can never comprehend the whole, it is impossible because A part, is never apart from the whole. It's something like, you can never lift your own self (Whole) using your own hands (Parts). Godel's Incompleteness Theorem is perfectly applicable in this case. Anything said or spoken or written will always remain partial and limited. As Consciousness is Limitless for our present configuration and dimension, it may remain beyond our comprehension and understanding FOR EVER, AND FOR EVER. There is no QUESTION about YOU. There is NO WAY to question the condition about BEING. YOU already are the unconditional pre-existing condition FOR A QUESTION TO EMERGE. So, you are already the ANSWER. You are the Imagination of yourself. To Dream or Imagine ....'IT' has to be Intelligent. Consciousness may be the cosmic Intelligence, the sole creator of everything in it's Realm.

What is it which we measure with a clock ? ?

❤️

What does it mean?

@Endangered-EGO so, movement is time or movement happen in time?

What are you talking about

False There is nothing but the truth. Truth is all states equally.

What do you think about the idea that there is no death, as in, a deprivation chamber where we somehow exist in some kind of limbo where nothing exists, except our dread that we are dead and cognition that there is nothing? It seems that life only can know life. It seems that there is no way life can know non-existence (how reductionist science explains it). For example, take total anaesthesia. For most of the people time / existence during anaesthesia will be completely lost - for them these few minutes / hours did not exist - the moment they wake up immediately follows up their last conscious moment. Similarly, if someone is dead (looking from reductionist science standpoint), they cannot be aware of the fact they are dead. So for them, the next moment they are aware of, must be after millions or trillions of years has passed and millions of universes had existed - until they exist again (so the matter organises itself in same way to form that exact person). This seemingly naive thinking could bring about discussion about "Eternal return", that has been in an interesting way discussed by Anthony Peake whose book I read recently and found as thought provoking.

@snowyowl what about deep sleep? What happens there?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Noble_Truths What are your thoughts on the four noble truths in Buddhism? Are they accurate or somewhat reductionistic and simplistic?

Great examples, guys. I think I changed my mind. There might be a fine distinction between the two.

@Mason Riggle nice. I like Alan watts. So are you a solipsist or pantheist? Because you seem to mix the two together

Can you explain this a little bit

No there is no free will. Neuroscience has long ago disproved free will. What I mean is you can't dream up this world however you want. If you jump off a tall building you will die.. If solipsism is true.. Then surely you can change the laws of physics rn

That you can't manipulate reality consciously through your mind.

I don't believe there is a distinction between pain and suffering.

If so then why they teach that you end suffering by ending your desire?

So there is a relationship between desire and dissatisfaction (evil)?.. As desire is what causes it.

That's a nice rephrase. So does it mean that desire is evil and one should not pursue desires?

The sense of being a separate self.

Isn't it oversimplification and black and white to say that all of life is suffering and that desire is the root of suffering? Isn't that a bit general and naive assumptions?

'Enlightenment' tends to be a notion that has been accepted through time/thought and the self clings to the idea and pursues that idea/notion. So the destination seems to become more important than the exploration/observation. The destination corrupts the exploration/observation. Looking for a way out means I am not interested in the exploration/observation but instead to outcome of a self that “becomes enlightened”(psychological safety). We seem to take in ideas from the past(thought) and pursue those ideas to become something other than what we are that moment(escape). We seek what we have learned about enlightenment to end our pain, suffering, discontent. This itself is why we suffer. We are always looking to time (future) to solve psychological issues and that seems to be the root of those issues. We dis identify with what-is actually presently and we seek the idea, which is psychological evolution(time). We disidentify with “our experiences” which is the same as identifying with them. It’s in both cases a “movement of me/the chooser. Pretty peculiar game.

They aren't. The normie is already enlightened. He's just not recognizing it.

@MrWolf To keep me on my toes of course.