World is old.

It's not self evident and there is absolutely no empirical evidence to suggest that is the case. The concept that we create our reality is an ancient one as you know and does have some validity, but to embrace such a philosophy and choosing to ignore the empirical physical reality that is a common experience to us all is utter folly and leads to an incomplete comprehension and appreciation of the actual situation.

You really need to break out of this Taoist/Buddhist/Eastern mold that you keep wanting everything to squeeze into and except that it is but one small facet to be considered.

You keep projecting your lack of understanding of my posts as being my deficit and that I'm the one who "needs to understand".

You mentioned elsewhere about the time involved in contemplating such ideas and philosophies, yeah I get that and started to delve into such matters approximately two and a half decades before you were born, so yeah, I can dig it.

The phase of growth you are currently in engulfed me when I was about 16 or so. Don't worry, you'll grow out of it and into a more complete and less cluttered paradigm. :mickey:

The only reason why you had/have issues with thedopes posts are the same that most do, you are trying to interpret his statements through your own world view rather than simply reading what he is saying.
It took me a while to key into the "level" at which thedope operates, and now I "dig his vibe" for the most part.

 

Indeed, when you do not use cryptic stuff and analogies etc. you often make much more sense. Are you saying you are choosing not to hear the complain about lack of sense in your cryptic/analogy sentences? That's a pity. When I don't understand thedope's use of words he has reworded it (at least a bit more ) clearly every time I asked him As we have concluded: all we have on an internetforum are words. When a certain kind of words (cryptic for instance) provide more difficulties than advantages (even if it only counts for 2 people) it seems worthwile IF you care to be understood by them to reword it.

 

If you must look for "empirical" evidence to know that you are right then you have missed the chance to know yourself. There is no mold that I am in. I understand that you feel as though your age has brought you wisdom but perhaps instead of trying to bring me out of the "lack" of understanding you percieve you should try and show me how my understanding is flawed. As I have mentioned previously we all have our own flow of understanding. I do not imply that you need to adopt my understanding, just as I would hope that you do not expect me to adopt yours. If a dog were meant to fly it would have been given wings.

 

How is it a pity that you do not understand me? If we were meant to understand each other perfectly we would not be separate. You may not know this but you and Noxious already do understand me just as I have always understood others, including both of you. My thinking is far to broad to summarily reduce for better understanding. This is not to say that it is hard to understand or that I am more for trying. Trying to describe the indescribable is like trying to hold a cupful of water in your hand. It will always elude you.

 

your understanding isn't necessarily flawed, but it is incomplete,
and yes, my age has afforded me wisdom that you do not nor cannot possess at this stage in your life.
As I said above, I totally understand "where your coming from", been there, done that, but it is an incomplete paradigm.
For you to eschew empirical evidence or not want to test things against non subjective criteria is folly.

I'm thinking maybe it is you, young Padawan, who needs to get to know themselves more completely and without filters. :sultan:

 

Sigh... It's a pity because if you wish to make sense with those cryptic vagueness and analogies I wish to understand what you are saying. The pity is this is not happening so far.

So we are just not ment to understand eachother? Is that what you are saying? I'm sorry I don't understand your words right away.

It's great you understand us (although I always try to speak in clear words so I was actually striving to be understood) and I'm sure I understand (parts of) you but if we are in a conversation it's a bummer when we seem to talk not to each other but missing each others points. After all we are most often conversing about a particular subject, not about eachother's beings or understandig in general.

Not sure what this means. Too broad to summarily reduce for better understanding? Seems kind of an excuse. I have the feeling you didn't mean it as one. You are more for trying what exactly? To explain your thinking?

 

Did I say that? I do not believe so

Because this may be a lack of understanding what I meant when I said that was that we shouldn't rely on empirical evidence when forming our own understanding. Not at first. Once you have a theory test that theory using empirical evidence if possible. My entire belief system can be bolstered by "empirical evidence" yet I do not need that evidence to know that it is my Way. Also I would like to state that all criteria are subjective. They were created by mankind for his purposes. This is why such knowledge must be born from wisdom. I do not think we agree on how old either one of us is. That is a discussion for another time perhaps?

 

may I suggest you give this a look;

http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?t=408443&f=48

penned in my former incarnation as PB.
take note of the section's on being aware of your own self and on vocabulary and expressing the inexpressible.:2thumbsup:

 

As I have already said we

already do understand each other. Our physical brains may not comprehend but our consciousness does. No I do expect you to grasp this automatically, it is not something I have gone into detail about at all. Not on here.

All subjects are directly related to our being and understanding in general. In fact they are our being and understanding.

The Tao of Understanding

 

Yup, the insane asylums are full of people who are completely convinced their take on reality is correct, damn what the rest humanity or empirical evidence says!!!

WTF
Uhmmm, what's not to agree about??
Birth dates are a fixed point in time, no room for interpretation there and I am over twice your age, hell I have kids older than you.

You see Indy, it's this type of nonsensical bullshit that you think says something, but is really just empty words laden with psuedo-metaphysical bullshit that has folks like Asmo and myself annoyed.

 

How many times must I say this, I do not proclaim my understanding to be the ultimate or pure truth. I completly acknowledge that everything I know is wrong. Yet at the same time it is all correct. If you truly understand the ideas of the Way as you claim you should know why this is.

As I said a talk for another time. Perhaps if I actually decide to start the thread that has been forming inside my mind for a few months now. I did not say that our understanding of age said anything. In fact I stated that I wouldn't say anything concrete at this time.

 

Well, wether I grasp that or not... You are aware I am talking about understanding eachother in the topics and conversations we are having. Not some kind of subconscious understanding of being. I am talking about what you are saying. Nothing else. Trying to include the abstract scheme of things generally seems to only guarantee you getting more vague, not expanding or explaining on the words in the convo. So wether you and I believe the things in your quote in this post or not, it is not helpful to your conversation partner.

 

I was only responding to your questions at that given moment. What is it that you want me to explain within this thread? I will gladly attempt it.

 

What the fuck is this "Way" you keep referring to?
You seem to think that capitalizing a word imparts some mystical significance to it. LOL

In one breath you say words and such are meaningless, yet you keep fucking capitalizing "Way" as if it's a proper noun or some shit.
If you are referring to a particular belief system or teaching, please provide links/references, otherwise, please stop, you are making yourself look silly.

Funny how you keep saying "we all have our own flow of understanding" yet when someone doesn't agree with you or line up with your assumptions concerning them, they are the ones who "need to understand".

Dude, you contradict yourself soooo much in word and idea, do you ever read what you post???
Some consistency would be nice.

Frankly Indy, my understanding of this type of thought far transcends the paradigm you are currently infatuated with. I recognize the elements of truth inherent in the ideas/philosophies you espouse, but trust me, it is only one small facet.
You give the impression you believe it to be the complete diamond.

Keep trying, you'll get there.:sunny:

 

universe is older. world is one tiny place in it.
to one person, one lifetime, world is almost universe
but to universe world is a tiny dot and still a baby.

 

How is my saying that I would like you to understand my Way the same as saying you must? One must contradict themselves by human standards when talking as I do. To not contradict is to be incorrect. Yet for the sake of our understanding how am I contradicting myself? By saying that words are not meaningful and then capitalizing things or talking about them I am speaking to the understanding of those who know not my Way. Without words how can I commune with one such as yourself who is so bound by them? You say you understand my philosophy? Then tell me what it is if you please.

 

Upon reading these posts between the three of you, I consider again and now wonder at a comment you made to me in passing Indy, regarding my false verses and feigning surprise at Noxious being irritated with your posts, as if to highlight mine to be held up for comparison? Forgive me if I misunderstand your intention, but I am wondering what might I or my verses have to do with this peculiar infatuation of yours? Was it the verbosity?

 

I am not certain what infatuation you are referring to. If you feel offended by what I said I can assure you that it was meant as a harmless joke. Basically saying that if I wrote like that (which I cannot) Noxious would probably find fault with my posts even more so. The fact that you can write like that is quite impressive, at least in my mind. Granted I have no clue if it was correct and what not but at least it sounded good.

 

The verses were by my own hand, but were meant only to humor.
I took no offence to the comment and I see that all of that conversation has since been deleted. I was only curious as it seemed you were not speaking to me, but to an other; the infatuation I refer to is the very discussion at hand herein this thread, but perchance I've overestimated your comittment to the subject matter and for this I beg pardon of you.

 

Alas! I've forgotten to give thanks for the compliment paid to my writing! Thank you