Ziran

~blinks~ Color me curious

Got it. ~thumbs-up~ With the highest respect, with what authority or knowledge do you **actually** possess in regard to asserting anything about me? It's conjecture, at best. You should know by now, I'm unique. An outlier. Not because I'm better, just because I've had access and hours and hours and hours of practice. At least consider? From a practical perspective? Everytime you tell me about myself, it's a fail. It shuts down the conversation.

Hmm. Correct me? The word choice 'but', disjunct, is not entirely consistent with the rest of what you're writing in this thread and others? 'But' is a disjunct. It excludes. Are you excluded? What if 'but' is replaced with 'and', conjunct? 'And' connects. 'But' disconnects. 'And' includes. It's a minor suggestion. It could be completely wrong. However, I'm curious. "Body talks about, for me. And I am always What I am." How does that feel when reading it back to yourself? Any difference?

Awareness. A square is a rectangle, a rectangle is not a square. Like an impossibly large cone, like an ice cream cone, floating in tbe sky. Looking from one extreme it's a point, and from the other it's completely void. What you're observing, I think, is the limit of awareness. Awareness cannot be aware of itself. It's a reflexive paradox. Deriving it is complicated, but I can try to explain if you want. For those that are curious, look up Russel's paradox.

Pure awareness.

Not void. Pure awareness?

Here's a wiki article which describes "understanding" as contrasted with "knowing". It's useful for rapid deployment and language learning. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackboxing Here's a Ytube on it: Secular western education and social media discourage understanding in favor of knowing. Knowing is rewarded. Inquiry is not. It's a big problem, world-wide.

Most succinctly, "knowing" is a masculine form of cognition. It's probing, intimate, sharp. It's fact based. In order to "know" one must cross into the other's territory. That's why "knowing" is a euphemism for consumation of nuptials. "Understanding" is a feminine form of cognition. Understanding a matter involves traversing around its perimeter, watching its behavior, without violating its border. "Knowing" is like a closed fist. When something is known, there is no denying it. It's a sort of brute force type of cognition. "Understanding" is like an open palm. The cognition is fluid, and ideas blossom from it. Understanding trumps knowing when considering... the "unseen". It's "void"?

"Be yourself; because, no one else can." Good Morning

Axioms are true, both, in general and in particular, at the same time. In this thread, please share optimistic axioms. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Example: "Every leap is weightless, at the top, regardless of its size. "

the word I hear/see in this regard is "certitude". You'll find it most often among Bahai. ETA: Google Search Link

Can it be described as an edge case, a specific type of cognition within the general category of "knowing": Gnostic-agnostism. "it's certainly unknown"? From another POV, same cognition, can it be described as "understanding" something without needing to "know" it deeply, intimately? The common example here is the relationship between two friendly neighbors. Feudal lords, for example. These two understand each other w/o knowing each other deeply, intimately, etc. This distinction between knowing and understanding can be found in the Bible where "knowing" is a euphemism: Adam knew Eve... ( chapter 4, verse 1, iir) ETA: RE: Understanding, see here: Lexicon Search for "Tevunah" - deep probing understanding

"sometimes" or even "often", but not "always" There are types of logic which encourage intellectual awe and heart-felt wonder ( simultaneously ). Unless I'm mistaken, that's the logic you're using. Whether or not the heart is being stifled depends on whether the cognition is expanding or contracting.

"When ownership ends....." ... like walking through the woods, smelling apple blossoms, and following its scent. "... including a thought ... " ... these are not my thoughts. "... a word ... " ... it is not my word. " ... love is all there is. " .. love is all there is. Agreed. Thank you.

This one is true. ... it's as close as close can be. The OT also has this teaching coming from Moses : " it is very close to you, in your mouth and in your heart ... ". Deut 30 This one, imo, needs attention. The first part is true, but the last part is not. 1) Allah is the one which is distinguishing this from that, for lack of better words. Referring back to the OT, Genesis 1, Allah is the one which is "dividing waters from waters". 2) Because of this, Allah is equally, consistently, completely, and simultaneously within-and-without the heavens, the earth, the believing-heart. - Allah is the one and only dividing heaven from earth and vice versa. - Allah is the one and only dividing believing-heart from disbelieving heart. ?? If so, James, How can it be rationally asserted that Allah is contained ?? ?? Allah is the one and only dividing between contained and released ??

Yes. It's odd isn't it? The realization is "lacking-loss" or "finding-everything-excluding-loss".

https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=XtwTohlg1b4&si=WPJMWMoJnS-w0e12

~grinning and nodding~ Masculine love will knock you down. Feminine love will eat you alive. ~sigh~ ~blushing~

Healthy love is partnered with respect. Unhealthy love, lacking respect is obsession. Healthy love for others includes love for oneself. Unhealthy love for others, lacking love for oneself is fool-hardy and unsustainable. That's why the knight in shining armor in the storybooks is always riding off into the sunset after saving the town and the damsel from whatever it is that's threatening them.

~nods~ If it doesn't feel right, then, it's not the end.

No, you're not alone. It's a significant "let-down". Many refer to awakening as a "burden". A heavy burden. But, be assured if you keep going, consistently on any path, eventually it flips. Best wishes,

Genesis: -------------------------------------- . ורוח אלהים מרחפת על־פני המים׃... Ruach-Elohim ( the spirit of God ) fluttered upon the face of the "waters". -------------------------------------- IOW: it "tickled" ^^Enjoy^^

Answer: Because it "tickles" What is "tickling"? Consider it, follow the cognition to its root, from where it's blossoming. There you'll find a brilliant kernel of effervescent Truth.

Heard. Fair. May I inquire, most respectfully? Why did you laugh? What is laughing? Why does The Buddha ( the awakened ) laugh?

It's a culturally inculcated natural inclination. In other words, it's part of the human experience. Specifically, the midday nap designates one as a member of the governing institution, property owners, NOT labor. It's evident cross-culture and even cross-species. My favorite examples come from coupling behaviors in the animal kingdom. But looking only at human behavior, I think the best example comes from ancient Mesopotamia, the fertile crescent, where the feudal lords ate on couches, while the laborers were forced to eat while working in the fields. And from the opposing side, counter-intuitively, a wonderful example: the Latin American "siesta". Beyond that, and most important: ... Because it's 100% consistent with your own direct experience. It's consistent in general. It's consistent in particular. It's truly-true. Verily. Amen-Amen. Like the Book of John? In the Christian bible. That's what Jesus meant ( in the story ), when he said: "Amen-Amen". See below, if you're curious. Regardless it can be derived thru inquiry: "Decadent" matches your own direct experiences? "Decadent" matches the direct experience of others? "Decadent" is consistent with those direct experiences in general? "Decadent" is consistent with those direct experiences in particular? If so, I call on the heavens and the earth as witnesses... It's truly-true.