A verse from Quran and a Hadith from Prophet Muhammad is enough

[James123]

5 hours ago, VeganAwake said:

Unknowing 🙏 

La İlahe İllallah 🙏☝🏻

[Ziran]

18 hours ago, James123 said:

Can you clarify?

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".

18 hours ago, James123 said:

Where I am really is deep down, all the way down of the eyes, or body. I don't know, but I am all the way down. I see the mind, thoughts, body movements at the surface. But, me as not something or nothing, it is just ducking me. That's all. Have no name, shape, identification, even as nothing, still an identification. Just Me.

It's "void"?

Edited 1 hour ago by Ziran

[Ziran]

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.

Edited 1 hour ago by Ziran

[James123]

38 minutes ago, Ziran said:

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".

I get it. 

30 minutes ago, Ziran said:

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.

My son is 2 years old. Do you know what I see as he growing up? He doesn't learn or know the language he just parrots or copy and pastes.

Therefore:

41 minutes ago, Ziran said:

It's "void"?

Even saying void or not void. İs it a sound, experience, imagination? None of it.

All I know is, I am what I am, always same. İt is not nothing, but there is nothing there.

And body is love and in love. İt works with love, heart pumps the love, it circling in entire dna, in blood, in air, even fingers writings. All works with love, without me getting involved.

[Ziran]

1 minute ago, James123 said:

Even saying void or not void. İs it a sound, experience, imagination? None of it.

Not void.

Pure awareness?

[Ziran]

2 minutes ago, James123 said:

He doesn't learn or know the language he just parrots or copy and pastes.

Pure awareness. 

[Ziran]

9 minutes ago, James123 said:

I am what I am

Awareness.

9 minutes ago, James123 said:

İt is not nothing, but there is nothing there.

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.

Edited 39 minutes ago by Ziran

[James123]

19 minutes ago, Ziran said:

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.

İt is not paradox. Arm is an arm, leg is a leg. Body is body. Me is Me. 

[James123]

@Ziran And action is never taken by me. 

I am not aware of anything. I am always what I am.

Action is taken by the body / mind, even saying or believing in paradox, or awareness is aware, these are the mind / body.

[James123]

@Ziran you can say, but you are aware of the body, because you define the body, love, what you are etc...

No.

one's you realize that actually not even realize, I don't know how to explain, like saying I am hungry, body hunger for food, and it talks about it.

And these sentences are exactly like that. Body talks about me, for me.

But I am always what I am.