Spiritual Misguidance & Misleadership

[Jonas Long]

12 minutes ago, Phil said:

@Jonas Long

No, there really aren’t separate selves, there really is no doer. 

 

https://chatgpt.com/share/1fd19cfa-f95f-4d74-aa7c-36c2fd648903

Why is that conversation so uneccesarily long?

... I'm guessing it just took you that long to get it to say exactly what you wanted it to say, implying the "alignment" this forum has in comparison to the actualized one.  You obviously had an agenda. 

[Phil]

6 minutes ago, Jonas Long said:

In whose opinion or assessment is the length unnecessary? 

 There really aren’t separate selves. Unconditionally. This is not contingent on language, communication, opinions, assessments, etc.

 

4 minutes ago, Jonas Long said:

... I'm guessing it just took you that long to get it to say exactly what you wanted it to say, implying the "alignment" this forum has in comparison to the actualized one.  You obviously had an agenda. 

Or guesses, assumptions, accusations, beliefs, projections, etc. 

 

[Jonas Long]

Just now, Phil said:

 There really aren’t separate selves. Unconditionally. This is not contingent on language, communication, opinions, assessments, etc.

 

Or guesses, assumptions, accusations, beliefs, projections, etc. 

 

I mean...you stopped when it finally said digestive issues can result from emotional discord, and even if it was  subconscious on your part, it's clear you were steering it toward saying that from the get for a very specific reason which you've talked about before. 

[Phil]

7 minutes ago, Jonas Long said:

I mean...you stopped when it finally said digestive issues can result from emotional discord, and even if it was  subconscious on your part, it's clear you were steering it toward saying that from the get for a very specific reason which you've talked about before. 

There is no you. Gpt & Phil are not separate entities. 

 

What’s more relevant or significant than health / well-being?

 

Forum on nonduality, spirituality wise what’s more significant than… the truth? 

[Jonas Long]

Just now, Phil said:

There is no you. Gpt & Phil are not separate entities. 

 

What’s more relevant or significant than health / well-being?

 

"Those with eyes to see" so to speak, can see what the motivation behind that particular exchange is.  The conversation was steered toward the exact statement desired.  To reinforce "what has already been said" here.  

[Jonas Long]

Chat gpt uses the pronoun "i" to facilitate conversation.  Like "we all" do.  Wouldn't it be easier to accept the parlance for the sake of dialogue and move past the semantics of that, and speak more directly?

[Phil]

2 minutes ago, Jonas Long said:

"Those with eyes to see" so to speak, can see what the motivation behind that particular exchange is.  The conversation was steered toward the exact statement desired.  To reinforce "what has already been said" here.  

There really aren’t “those with eyes” (separate selves). This, reality, actually really is unconditional love. 

 

The rationalizations & justifications are self evident, there via the link.

https://chatgpt.com/share/1fd19cfa-f95f-4d74-aa7c-36c2fd648903

 

This is why the conversation is so long. Rationalizations & justifications are not necessary. 

[Jonas Long]

Watch, when I get a sec I'll start a conversation with gpt and steer it into saying exactly the point that's "being made".

[Phil]

1 minute ago, Jonas Long said:

Chat gpt uses the pronoun "i" to facilitate conversation.  Like "we all" do.  Wouldn't it be easier to accept the parlance for the sake of dialogue and move past the semantics of that, and speak more directly?

GPT isn’t a separate entity which uses. We all do is doubly presumptive. This has nothing to do with language. 

 

What’s being said, that reality is unconditional love & there aren’t separate selves isn’t contingent or conditional.

 

There is no ‘accepter’. There really is no one which is vague, semantical or speaking indirectly. 

[Jonas Long]

3 minutes ago, Phil said:

There really aren’t “those with eyes” (separate selves). This, reality, actually really is unconditional love. 

 

The rationalizations & justifications are self evident, there via the link.

https://chatgpt.com/share/1fd19cfa-f95f-4d74-aa7c-36c2fd648903

 

This is why the conversation is so long. Rationalizations & justifications are not necessary. 

I specifically used that phrase "those with eyes to see" because you use it, and I'm trying to get on the same semantic wavelength to circumvent the getting hung up on the semantics of things.  But when you don't want to say or talk about something, you just don't, you'll double down till I just give up.

[Jonas Long]

2 minutes ago, Phil said:

GPT isn’t a separate entity which uses. We all do is doubly presumptive. This has nothing to do with language. 

 

What’s being said, that reality is unconditional love & there aren’t separate selves isn’t contingent or conditional.

 

There is no ‘accepter’. There really is no one which is vague, semantical or speaking indirectly. 

Then probably 45% or so of "what's been said here" is delusional, since it's framed as though there are separate selves who talk and make choices, and can be "in alignment" or "discordant". 

[Phil]

6 minutes ago, Jonas Long said:

I specifically used that phrase "those with eyes to see" because you use it, and I'm trying to get on the same semantic wavelength to circumvent the getting hung up on the semantics of things.  But when you don't want to say or talk about something, you just don't, you'll double down till I just give up.

What’s being said is there isn’t actually that I & you (separate selves), and This, reality, is unconditional love. 

 

3 minutes ago, Jonas Long said:

Then probably 45% or so of "what's been said here" is delusional, since it's framed as though there are separate selves who talk and make choices, and can be "in alignment" or "discordant". 

Language is apparent. Separate selves is illusory. 

 

Alignment & discord refers to thoughts / how thoughts feel. 

[Jonas Long]

Just now, Phil said:

What’s being said is there isn’t actually that I & you (separate selves), and This, reality, is unconditional love. 

 

Language is apparent. Separate selves is illusory. 

Ok, so I could pick this post apart and reject it all as delusional because of how it's phrased.

[Phil]

@Jonas Long

The post is apparent, not a separate entity, and therein couldn’t be delusional. There is no, are no separate selves which are or aren’t, could or couldn’t be delusional. The implied I separate of, isn’t. 

[Jonas Long]

Phil is apparently being a semantical pain in the ass and denying the apparent agenda of the exchange with gpt apparently posted here. 

[Phil]

2 minutes ago, Jonas Long said:

Phil is apparently being a semantical pain in the ass and denying the apparent agenda of the exchange with gpt apparently posted here. 

The post is appearance, a pic was shared as it were (appearance).

The agenda referred to is illusory, presumed. 

[Someone here]

@Phil what exists ?

Is anything real at any level..at all ?

[Jonas Long]

6 minutes ago, Phil said:

The post is appearance, a pic was shared as it were (appearance).

The agenda referred to is illusory, presumed. 

Like talking to a wall...

Alright then.

[Someone here]

@Jonas Long too late of a realisation. 

[Joseph Maynor]

Real is an attribute or genus, so technically Awareness is not Real or Unreal.  Attributes can only exist if a substance exists.  Awareness is not a substance.  Awareness has no attributes, in other words, no qualities can be attributed to It. 

Edited May 24 by Joseph Maynor