What is God?

[Someone here]

16 minutes ago, Phil said:

Say whatever ya like about Me, just mind the guidelines please. 

Philosophically, yes, pointless. 

 

Deflection & projection are overlooked in the overlooking of misinterpretation. 

 

Anything said which is relevant is therein overlooked. Such as anger is felt. 

It's not meant as an insult. What I mean is you keep repeating the same thing over and over again expecting it to 'click' In my mind.. But I told you countless times that I disagree with a big chunk of your worldview. 

Am I allowed to disagree here? (not sure why you brought up the guidelines). 

12 minutes ago, Phil said:

This is overlooked… for thoughts. 

Beliefs are the means. 

How so? I don't "believe" that not everything is thought. I can tell the difference between a thought of an apple and actual apple. It's like you're saying that there is no difference between the two. It sort of like saying there is no difference between having sex with a hot super model and masturbating to a thought of her. 

9 minutes ago, Mandy said:

Do they really? Cause I don't agree and neither does science or Nike

What I meant is that there is no thinker of thoughts. That's correct. But what are the practical ramifications of that? Sitting on the couch all day sulking? At the End of the day we have responsibilities and obligations to show  up for. 

I falled into that trap before.. That given that there is no free will and choice then I should be pessimistic and unproductive. 

I have been there. I have experienced 

My thinking  obstructing my daily life, random thoughts obstructing my days work, when I want to read a book but some random thoughts attack me out of nowhere 

12 minutes ago, Mandy said:

How can a thought control a thought if there are never two simultaneous thoughts? There's no subject, object verb structure. 

That's a smart point. 

So you are basically saying there is no free will and choice. And I agree with this. 

16 minutes ago, Mandy said:

I don't dismiss my daughter's experience of the illusion of the mirage of water in the desert, I point out the phenomenon. 

Yes. But phil keeps reducing everything to mere thoughts. Implying that they basically don't exist In reality In any actual way. 

18 minutes ago, Mandy said:

You're waiting for it to be an effect of something, whereas it's already the case, prior to conception of neurons, or worms eating your dead brain. Prior to the conception of before or after. 

There is no mind without matter. There is no consciousness without brain. There is no neurons firing up without thoughts. 

Also it just doesn't make sense logically.. How would you know that you have stopped thinking? Isn't "I'm not thinking about anything right now" itself a thought? 

 

[Joseph Maynor]

5 hours ago, Someone here said:

Is your wife a thought? 

 

This is next level funny!  "Tell that to her" is the next line.

Edited March 29, 2023 by Joseph Maynor

[Phil]

18 minutes ago, Someone here said:

It's not meant as an insult.

It wasn’t taken that way because there’s no meaning. 

 

18 minutes ago, Someone here said:

What I mean is you keep repeating the same thing over and over again expecting it to 'click' In my mind..

No expectation either 

 

18 minutes ago, Someone here said:

But I told you countless times that I disagree with a big chunk of your worldview. 

Am I allowed to disagree here? (not sure why you brought up the guidelines). 

No worldview is not a worldview.

There is no worldview  ‘here’. 

Likewise… no belief(s) is not a belief.

No mind / cessation is not a thought, idea, concept, etc. 

That there aren’t separate selves is not a belief.  That there are separate selves, such as an enlightened self, a you which becomes something, or a you which avoids the truth etc, etc… are beliefs. 

 

21 minutes ago, Someone here said:

How so? I don't "believe" that not everything is thought. I can tell the difference between a thought of an apple and actual apple.

The suggestion here is that that is a belief.

Again, that there aren’t separate selves isn’t a belief.

If there’s a separate thing, an apple, you’re (believing you are) a separate self. 

AND ALL OF THE SUFFERING LIES THEREIN. 

 

Consciousness as it were is infinite. Infinite = no finite (no apple).

“Apple” is just the thought™ “apple”. 

Perception can not be thunk. 

“Perception” (the actuality of “the apple”, and “perception”) is pure magic. 

It is not possible to know what an apple is. 

 

21 minutes ago, Someone here said:

It's like you're saying that there is no difference between the two.

Sans a thought believed that there is. 

Nonduality; not, two. 

 

29 minutes ago, Someone here said:

Sitting on the couch all day sulking? At the End of the day we have responsibilities and obligations to show  up for. 

No! 😂 That’s a (rather ridiculous) misinterpretation. 

 

[Phil]

2 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

This is next level funny!  "Tell that to her" is the next line.

It’s the basis of most humor exchanged between us daily. So to speak of course… she gets it. 

We aren’t sulking on the couch. 😂 

[Blessed2]

@Someone here Sorry if you feel frustrated about me bringing this up again but I really, really recommend reading ACIM. Especially the Workbook could be super helpful in regard to the subjects of conversations in this thread.

 

I know you might have some prejudice regarding ACIM ("weak sauce" etc.) but honestly it's probably one of, if not the most, "woke" spiritual / nondual content on the planet. Check for yourself though, before believing me or anyone else. But actually check before drawing conclusions.

 

Don't start the Workbook before getting familiar with the "theory" part first. It's imperative so the practices can reach what they're aiming at. The main Text itself in the course is probably a bit too hard to follow right away because of the language so I recommend reading an introductory book first. It'll be way easier to follow the text.

 

I listed some good introduction sources and other info here:

Feel free to ask any questions you might have on that thread btw.

 

When you've gotten familiar with the "theory", start reading the main Text and doing one Workbook practice a day, like it suggests in the source material. From the first one forward, without skipping any.

 

Listen to how you feel and don't take it too seriously. If you feel like taking a day or two off, it's totally fine. If you feel like just exploring the Text, Manual for Teachers, Supplements etc. without following rigidly from start to finish, you can do that too. I know the material can be quite overwhelming at first.

 

The practices are not at all like the usual meditation or self-inquiry you might be already familiar with btw, if you find those frustrating or uncomfortable. They're very easy and don't require much time. No need to "silence the mind" or whatever. Just be you, and do the practice! Enjoy!

 

If it gets too overwhelming though, take some time off and ground with basic mindfulness and breathing meditation.

 

 

And congratz on the girlfriend! Did you have that on a dreamboard or something? 😁

Edited March 29, 2023 by Blessed2

[Someone here]

25 minutes ago, Phil said:

The suggestion here is that that is a belief.

Again, that there aren’t separate selves isn’t a belief.

If there’s a separate thing, an apple, you’re (believing you are) a separate self. 

AND ALL OF THE SUFFERING LIES THEREIN

Ok I have few questions.. 

1-Is it possible to draw a boundary between any two objects in the universe? Like let's say you hold an apple on one hand and you hold an egg on the other hand... These are two SEEMINGLY different objects occupying different locations in space, right? 

So if I define the self as this body over here (my body) and not Phil's body.. Then isn't that's  two separate  selves? 

2-interested to know how ALL of suffering being an effect of believing I'm a separate self...? If I stepped my toe.. What does the belief in separate selves got to do with the pain of stepping your toe? 

25 minutes ago, Phil said:

Apple” is just the thought™ “apple”. 

Perception can not be thunk. 

“Perception” (the actuality of “the apple”, and “perception”) is pure magic. 

It is not possible to know what an apple is

Got it. So you are basically saying the actual thing out there that we label as "apple" is not the label itself. We've got the label.. And the we've got the actual thing which the label points to.. Is that what you mean? 

BTW I agree figuratively (not actually) that it's impossible to know what an apple is. 

In philosophy there is something called law of identity.. It states that a thing is itself and not other than that.  So A=A.  Apples are just apples.  Nothing more needs to be known. 

 

[Someone here]

@Blessed2 ok thanks for the suggestions. I will check it out right away after I'm done with this conversation with our beloved Phil and Mandy lol. 

P. S. No not dreamboard. I just started dating a girl in university and we had a lot of chemistry together and she is now "mine". The other guys stopped talking to her because they see her with me. 

 

[Mandy]

1 hour ago, Someone here said:

What I meant is that there is no thinker of thoughts. That's correct. But what are the practical ramifications of that? Sitting on the couch all day sulking? At the End of the day we have responsibilities and obligations to show  up for. 

I falled into that trap before.. That given that there is no free will and choice then I should be pessimistic and unproductive. 

I have been there.

 

The ramification of there being no thinker of thoughts is that the thinker thinks that he has to sit on the couch all day and think about there being no thinker of thoughts. 

 No. 

1 hour ago, Someone here said:

 

Yes. But phil keeps reducing everything to mere thoughts. Implying that they basically don't exist In reality In any actual way. 

Phil is pointing... Phil is pointing in a very humorous and direct way and you're looking at Phil pointing and pointing back at him instead of looking in the direction he is pointing! 

[Someone here]

3 minutes ago, Mandy said:

The ramification of there being no thinker of thoughts is that the thinker thinks that he has to sit on the couch all day and think about there being no thinker of thoughts. 

 No. 

Phil is pointing... Phil is pointing in a very humorous and direct way and you're looking at Phil pointing and pointing back at him instead of looking in the direction he is pointing! 

No he is not. He is just playing word games.  None of what he's saying corresponds to how he actually lives his life.  He is allowed to use the words "I" and "me" so easily if he wants to. But when someone else says it he just turn into a no-selfer fundamentalist. 

[Phil]

28 minutes ago, Someone here said:

Ok I have few questions.. 

1-Is it possible to draw a boundary between any two objects in the universe? Like let's say you hold an apple on one hand and you hold an egg on the other hand... These are two SEEMINGLY different objects occupying different locations in space, right? 

This is assuming there are already separate objects in a universe to draw a boundary between. 

 

28 minutes ago, Someone here said:

So if I define the self as this body over here (my body) and not Phil's body.. Then isn't that's  two separate  selves? 

That definition would be a thought believed. 

 

28 minutes ago, Someone here said:

2-interested to know how ALL of suffering being an effect of believing I'm a separate self...?

The “knower” is another way of saying the separate self. 

28 minutes ago, Someone here said:

If I stepped my toe.. What does the belief in separate selves got to do with the pain of stepping your toe? 

The pain of stubbing the toe would still be the same regardless of beliefs. But the sensation of the pain wouldn’t be believed to be that of a my toe. In a way, arguably, there is less of an experience of pain therein. 

[Mandy]

@Someone here Still looking at the words and the separate self, not what they're pointing to. Everything you say you are mirroring about yourself. What you want is in there.
 

I'm thrilled that you have a girlfriend, truly, but why speak about her in this way? Especially here, in this thread? 

 

25 minutes ago, Someone here said:

I just started dating a girl in university and we had a lot of chemistry together and she is now "mine". The other guys stopped talking to her because they see her with me. 

 

[Phil]

17 minutes ago, Someone here said:

No he is not. He is just playing word games.  None of what he's saying corresponds to how he actually lives his life.  He is allowed to use the words "I" and "me" so easily if he wants to. But when someone else says it he just turn into a no-selfer fundamentalist. 

This is deflection & projection. Trying to turn the conversation personal about a Phil is playing games. Same as “we have a problem & you have to go”. Birds of a feather. Loa. 

https://www.actualityofbeing.com/what-are-the-spheres

https://www.actualityofbeing.com/what-is-deflection

https://www.actualityofbeing.com/what-is-projection

 

46 minutes ago, Someone here said:

Got it. So you are basically saying the actual thing out there that we label as "apple" is not the label itself. We've got the label.. And the we've got the actual thing which the label points to.. Is that what you mean? 

No. There is no ‘thing’ ‘out there’. 

There are the thoughts… ‘thing’ and ‘out there’. 

 

46 minutes ago, Someone here said:

BTW I agree figuratively (not actually) that it's impossible to know what an apple is. 

In philosophy there is something called law of identity.. It states that a thing is itself and not other than that.  So A=A.  Apples are just apples.  Nothing more needs to be known. 

That’s ignorance. 

[Someone here]

7 minutes ago, Phil said:

This is assuming there are already separate objects in a universe to draw a boundary between

Yes. Is this assumption correct? Because it's annoyingly obvious to me that my kitchen is not the same thing as my bathroom. 

7 minutes ago, Phil said:

That definition would be a thought believed. 

It's like you are trying to convince me that you are  In coma and awake simultaneously.  What do you make of this bag of skin and flesh called the body? That's as close as possible to be you. 

Of course I understand that the body Is a perception occurring within consciousness. But all of reality is occurring within consciousness. So what's the difference between my body and that table in front of me?  Why if I sliced my body in a half I will feel pain? Whereas if I sliced the table in a half I will not feel anything? 

12 minutes ago, Phil said:

The pain of stubbing the toe would still be the same regardless of beliefs. But the sensation of the pain wouldn’t be believed to be that of a my toe. In a way, arguably, there is less of an experience of pain therein.

What difference does it make? Pain is pain. And pain is bad. I don't give a shit about if it's conceptualized as mine or not.  The pain will be as equal in  intensity. 

13 minutes ago, Mandy said:

I'm thrilled that you have a girlfriend, truly, but why speak about her in this way? Especially here, in this thread? 

@Blessed2 asked me about it. 

[Mandy]

@Someone here Why did you respond in that particular way, as if she's your new possession instead of a human being your in a relationship with? Why didn't you mention something like how fun she is to be around, or something else like that instead of with "other guys stopped talking to her"? 

[Someone here]

3 minutes ago, Mandy said:

@Someone here Why did you respond in that particular way, as if she's your new possession instead of a human being your in a relationship with? Why didn't you mention something like how fun she is to be around, or something else like that instead of with "other guys stopped talking to her"? 

haha I apologise if that sounded ill intended to you as a woman . I definitely do not treat her as a possession of mine .I treat her like a human being with her own emotions and priorities etc . So if she isn’t in the mood for phone sex ..I won't force her .

I just wanted to brag a little bit because this is my first adult intimate relationship with someone.  Don't read too much into it  🙂 

[Phil]

12 minutes ago, Someone here said:

Yes. Is this assumption correct?

No. 

12 minutes ago, Someone here said:

Because it's annoyingly obvious to me that my kitchen is not the same thing as my bathroom. 

I would question the annoyingly aspect. As in, why does it feel that way. 

[Someone here]

12 minutes ago, Phil said:

No. 

I would question the annoyingly aspect. As in, why does it feel that way. 

Maybe it's a bad choice of words from my part . I just wanted to say it's blatantly obvious to me.  

This issue of boundaries is very interesting because look ..when we zoom into the quantum level ..everything becomes one unified field or soup of particles.  The more you zoom into a boundary it dissolves.  But we are under the spell that we live in a world that consists of distinct objects with clear boundaries between them. Its both an illusion and not at the same time. At least that's how I see it .

[Phil]

@Someone here

Does ‘a boundary’ dissolve… or is a belief (in boundaries) dispelled? 

Does an everything become one unified field… or is the belief in separate physical things, and ‘all physical things as everything’ dispelled?

Therein, what is the ‘it’ which is being said to be both an illusion and not?

An illusion isn’t both this and that. An illusion seemed like, or was thought or believed to be X… but never actually was (X). 

[Mandy]

1 hour ago, Someone here said:

haha I apologise if that sounded ill intended to you as a woman . I definitely do not treat her as a possession of mine .I treat her like a human being with her own emotions and priorities etc . So if she isn’t in the mood for phone sex ..I won't force her .

I just wanted to brag a little bit because this is my first adult intimate relationship with someone.  Don't read too much into it  🙂 

"As a woman", no not really, if a woman talked about her boyfriend like that I'd question it in the same way.

 Why is a relationship with someone ever cause for bragging? 

[Someone here]

25 minutes ago, Phil said:

Does ‘a boundary’ dissolve… or is a belief (in boundaries) dispelled? 

It dissolves. Even tho it wasn't real to begin with. But that is ONLY in the quantum level. If You assume that the quantum level is the fundamental level of existence then yes.. The illusion of boundaries dissolves.  However, There is no particular reason to make this assumption.

Just because that is all you can see doesn’t mean that is all there is.

Non duality just means there is no  separation whatsoever; “I”, “You”, “This” , “That” are all false. Everything is just one essence. That's what quantum physics revealed. Again talking about the micro level. Because at the macro level it's obvious that there are boundaries between any two objects. 

34 minutes ago, Phil said:

Therein, what is the ‘it’ which is being said to be both an illusion and not?

An illusion isn’t both this and that. An illusion seemed like, or was thought or believed to be X..... But never actually was( X) 

So according to this definition.. Is a dream at night an illusion or not?  Isn't it both at the same time? 

6 minutes ago, Mandy said:

Why is a relationship with someone ever cause for bragging? 

Because I struggled a lot over the years in my dating life. In high school I saw the boys flirting and toying around with girls and I alone didn't have the balls to go talk to a girl. Instead I go home and masturbate. 

So I can't even believe that  I have a girlfriend. This is so alien to me. It's like a new season of my life. My whole life I've lived a tiresome harsh life. So I needed the feminine energy to heal me. Ask Phil about his relationship with his wife and how important is that for a guy's well being. 

Men absolutely cannot survive without women. But we are in denial about it