ZzzleepingBear

He seem to cast some sort of fuel spell, judging by the magic wand movement. Good stuff!

To pretend takes effort. If someone making a effort, they can be recognized as real in their effort to pursue something. To solve a problem, you need to begin where you're at. Maybe start with asking yourself, what you want to get out of asking yourself all these questions to begin with?

Since I like to interpret dreams. I'll do the same here in this dream reality. So let's bring up the fabric of reality (no pun intended). Buttons is a grounding hub in this reality fabric, to either open or close something. My feeling tells me that finding a button would be a message of grounding points. The button in and of itself, is what provides fabric to latch on to. So to be able to open up a closed fabric with buttons, requires it to be grounded/closed first. And that is what buttons provide. So to summarize. Grounding points of buttons, makes openness or closing a way for you to decide more consciously, rather than being stuck in one of the two states. Possibly a gentle reminder of grounded decisions.

The separation is part of perception. Infinity and finite is the relationship that establish what we come to know as value. Value creates meaning. And meaning creates movement. To give you a example. Imagine playing a teambased online game. If you learn the rules of the game and gain experience and learn things along the way, you become a more valuable player, not only yourself but for your whole team. You are restricted to play whitin certain rules in this game, but you have the ability to utilize and explore anything that isn't ruled out. The rules of the game are consciously and carefully implimented inorder to create value. Despite the endless possibilities to create any kind of online game. Someone could create a teambased online game, where everyone who participate can push one button and win instantly. But who would even play such a game with no limitations in the firstplace, why even bother if all that was needed is to push one button to win? So inorder to be concious of value within infinity, there needs to be certain imposed limitations of finite form, to be able to experience any bliss at all. What would unity even mean without seperation? The Human form is a finite image of the infinity of forms that God can maintain at the same time. Just as the devices we use to communicate through here, may be vastly different builds. But electricity is the main source that unites all computers under the lable computer. Without electricity, there is no computer, no matter how perfectly built it is. It would never have been recognized as a computer without electricity.

Nice.. I mostly try to follow kim jong un's advice. He is even more successful because he owns his own country and got his own nukes.

It's a impossible idea based on the following reasons. To begin it's own existence, implies that to exist is created by a particular cause of some sort. It would be like looking for a wave in the ocean that isn't wet. Someone has to be present prior to where the starting line is agreed upon.

I'm not in total disagreement here. But I just want to adress what stands out a bit to me, for the sake of discussion. This is the main thing. Even if we try to communicate with as much mutual understanding as possible. We can't explain away or pinpoint intuitiveness according to a dictionary. BUT. It makes more sense from a logical perspective, if we are trying to frame intuition according to a dictionary. I how ever do agree that logic and intuition complement eachother, and so we might entangle ourselves in an impossible equation if we take side with any of the two. Since both of them are required atleast to some degree to form a thought at all. To give you an example of the most recent intuition I had, that didn't require my immidiate understanding. I was about to go to the store for some groceries, and I always make sure to have more than enough money on the card for any regular grocery shopping. But this particular time, I had a sense that I should logg into my bank and check, without any real reason I could come to think of. I almost dismissed the idea, but the feeling of loging into my bank was stil present without being a intrusive or annoying thought. So I decided, oh well let's log into the bank fast and see what this is about. And to my surprise, there was almost no money on my card that day, since I used quite a bit the day or days before this incident. As I re-read what I just wrote. Could "logging into my bank" be the immidiate understanding maybe?? To do exactly that, was very clear to me as part of the intuition. But as I see it, it would stil only be half of the equation until I act on such a intuition to see whats up. While I do agree with this. I may add that my understanding of intuition, is that it's almost impossible to make a definition out of such a fleeting glimpse of direction that intuition may give. It can often come and go in various ways, and to different degree. While logic on the other hand, usually follow a more restrictive narrative of thoughts that can be constructed and re-constructed in any part of the process, with a matter of willingness. That's atleast my two cents on the matter so far.

One of my best dreams, oddly enough started out with a thought prior to me falling asleep that must have triggered this dream that I am about to share. The thought was that I didn't think I could actually fall in love with someone anymore. It was not a sad thought or anything, it was more like a realization that dawned on me before going to sleep. It was a very short dream of a scenario where a serial killer had a woman as a hostage, in some kind of ruin a few floors high. I somehow rescued her, and was shortly thereafter lying with my head in her lap, in a empty park at night, so madly in love with eachother. More in love than I ever felt before irl. I then slowly faded out of that dream with a gentle but distant beeping sound that felt like some kind of distant signal while coming back to earth. I could even feel holding her hand as I slowly faded into waking up. It sounds strange, but it felt like I "woke back" into waking up here irl. So going from that dream reality, into this reality dream. The dream itself was like a short sweet reminder of the capability of that romantic love stil is very real and possible.

All these pointers are good in a logical way. But just the definition of intuition here feels a bit too limited imo. My intuition can often be as a nudge of awareness of something. So to call it immediate understanding is only partially true, atleast for me. I can make a decision based on intuition, without understanding exactly why I made that choice, until after the event has passed.

My final thought on this is topic. Logic is the how, while the intuition is the why. It's a intertwined relationship of the two into one.

I'm open to the idea, but I wouldn't be so fast as to proclaim any particular belief around a topic like this. So is there any other life out there in the universe? I say maybe, probably.

No. But it could be misinterpreted, there lies the problem. When you desire something, you crave something in hope to fulfill a satisfaction in some kind of pleasure. This craving goes far beyond needs or reasonable aspirations to live a balanced life. If a desires main purpose is to satisfy pleasure, it then becomes a closed loop. Or a behaviour cycle. If you desire to satisfy your pleasure, you have to know that pleasure is a heightened state, that's why it feels so good. But what comes up must eventually come down. This is why emotions can be refered to as being on a rollercoaster. And you then have to come to terms with, what part of your desire that you haven't come to terms with yet. Inorder to break the cycle. Desire is a driving force, but not a destination. So you can have all kind of desires as long as you don't expect pleasure to be the final end goal of your desires. Pleasure comes and goes, and once that is fully understood, there is no need to conflate the driving force of desire as a highway to fulfill pleasure.

Logic is part of discernment. Logic is meant to be limiting, since logic is used for the purpose to limit common misstakes of all sorts from being repeated in a vicious endless cycle.

No. But there are bearsprays, or you could probably use a air horn to scare away any bear easily. Trust me, I'm a bear after all. How come that you ask such a peculiar question if I may ask?

Well, dog spelled backwards is god;-)

@Yarco @Adodd All we need now is another Magic 8 ball to confirm that this one don't lie to us

This!

@Adodd @Yarco Guys guys let's stop messing around here in alright? If we want to settle any disagreements, then I think it's time to bring out the... Magic 8 ball:-)

You are probably right, since you know your issue firsthand. But here is short vid of a youtube doctor who covers all kind of subtle health issues. This may atleast be seemingly relevant to your problem. It could be worth to check out. Sometimes there is a bundle of issus that combines into one specific problem.

*Breaks open the thread again because of low quality lock*

It doesn't need to be one way or the other. If some degree of mutual understanding is the goal or of any interest, then context and distictions matters. While agreements doesn't require mutual understanding. So you don't need any common ground to feel that you know what is being said. I have for example experiences of using a smartphone, so I know how to use a smartphone in various ways. But my experience with a smartphone doesn't require that I understand how a smartphone works. Only that it work in a way that I personally want it to work. So I could not talk about any insight of how the technology itself works. And that understanding part can probably better be reached through watching videos and books, instead of trying to open up the smartphone without any knowledge at all, despite my constant daily use of one. I think this is some fiting quotes to what I try do higlight with my ramblings. "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function." - Scott Fitzgerald "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle And I found this gem on google as well. "How do you entertain a thought?" "When you entertain a thought, you're bringing it in, but you're not accepting it. You're not immediately saying it's true. You're entertaining it with the idea that you're going to mull it over, think about your past experiences, and think critically about it to see if it's something you can accept."

Well said! If only more forum users took this approach that you described, then there would be alot more interesting and fruitful discussion, instead of miscommunication and arguing around buzzwords. As mentioned. There is clearly a desperate need for nuances in this forum to establish a common ground of understanding. And less of the parroted agreements based on the latest popular belief thrown around in here.

@Shambhu I've been following your replys and clarification with great interest in this thread. And I must say that you made it very easy to follow your examples and explanations, so I don't think you can take on any part of failure in terms of communication. Everything you adressed hits home. The only issue I can see, is that not everyone may take a genuine interest in what is being said, or take their time to reflect. Not everyone, but alot of forum users seem to have their own interpretation or ideas of certain words, and that would makes it more or less impossible to go into any deeper understanding in a mutual way. I'm no buddhist and are only somewhat familiar with vedantic teachings. But you made yourself very clear with everything said, with simple and coherent communication all the way. And it's also obvious that you found yourself a great teacher. ?

This is a great example. And non-duality is perfect for reminding us of the pardoxical nature of our thoughts and use of language. The core issue as I see (within this forum in particular). And why I personally bearly see any point in bringing up something like non-duality in for discussion in the first place. Is that I have a sneaky suspicion that plenty of forum users here will be tempted to nullify this non-duality example by accusing it for "being imaginary fairy tales.." When all words are being scrutinized and reduced down to fall under the lable imagination. Then there are simply no ground for even relative truth to be spoken about in a sincere way. Since any sentence at any point in time, can be adressed as to be merely imaginary as if that would be helpful in every on going discussion at any time possible. There certainly are times when you may want to discuss the absoluteness, where as consciousness is the final boss of any ultimate claims. Disagreements in and of itself are fine. But when disagreements on how language is supposed to be used or not, that needs to be properly adressed by finding the common ground. Or otherwise any attempts for communication will be devoid of rules and meaning altogheter. And that is what I see happen alot in the spiritual section here. But maybe that's just me idk.