aridus

True. It might seem that this is one case where logic does apply. Things have their inverse. This may superficially seem like a separation, but it isn't. Good example: if we define every single thing except one, we define everything. The undefined thing is defined by being the inverse of defined. Since we defined everything else, we know what the undefined thing isn't. I only say this as a bit of demonstration, it doesn't take into account overlapping natures.

When you read books, read. When you are lost, and have nothing but your books, and you are freezing to death: burn them. I'm not being flippant. I am truly sorry for your loss.

Probably 19 or 20 for regular access. Around 1995. Had computers long before that and dialed into BBs, though. Books in the family: I don't know. Well over a thousand I'd guess.

You know, that's interesting. Story: when I was a kid, I had a nice broom handle that I would play with. I liked the balance of it and how I could move with it, and not only that, I noticed how it moved me, so to speak. I ended up doing a kata like in your video, eventually. I didn't understand kata. I'm serious. I wasn't trying to emulate "stick fighting" or whatever some kids do, I was really doing a kata. Not in the exact same order he is doing, and a couple things were slightly different, but none the less. I think that was creativity at work.

Language again. I think that if I were to think that you should remove "I think", I still think and I still separate me from you. Better to just say "I think" and not fight it, unless it is necessary (and only then) I absolutely agree, that it can take place everywhere. It does take place everywhere. Nonduality is nonduality. There's a difference between "I" and "I". One is "me" in the first person. The other is just a person. A whole can regress into parts. Some times the parts run off on their own and say they are whole, but it does not change.

I've had two such extractions. I was prescribed antibiotics for only one of them. The one time it was prescribed was because I already had a raging infection. I took the antibiotic and it did work for me. But I don't have problems with them. I don't often take them either. I'm not offering advice. Just my worthless two cents. But I will say keeping your mouth clean and avoiding getting anything in the socket before it heals goes a very long way.

I can somewhat agree, but I think this is mostly language. I'll try to explain my view. Is a river rock in the river, under the river, part of the river, or is it all of these at the same time? Is water in the river, under the river, over the river, around it, part of it? Is water the river? Or is it all of these things at the same time? I do not think we 'go to' non-duality. I think one moves away from it, only, by being one. It's less about removing "I" and more about realizing that there is no "I". I find when I think of "I" and wanting to remove it, that makes me cling to it even more.

Hmm. In all fairness, I personally did not see him specify a standard. Did I miss something? I think we just want to be able to get to someone's point eventually. The back of this is that I could say "hugadabugadabugada" and it might absolutely mean something to me, but chances are it means something to me only.

Some times we are not ready to get what we ask for. I agree on one reality. The same reality where if you jump off a cliff alone, you probably die. Maybe some people are meant to do that, who knows. But I feel inclined to not speak much of it because it can tempt the ones who aren't meant for it. I don't think I could forgive myself if I said "go ahead!" and they had a similar experience to mine, or worse. I accept that experience now but then it was an extremely rude and frightening awakening which I didn't even know was possible.

I agree. Some times I have a fear that my cryptic writing (at least it is to some people apparently) will be rejected and cause problems because it does elsewhere. I do try to refine where I can, but some times I'm in a contemplative moment and things come out. Also I've seen more tolerance and acceptance here than usually seems to go on in life. Maybe if we refine a little more, have a little more tolerance, and everyone has a little more patience, everything will meet nicely in the middle.

Right, right. If I may add, if we don't mind... Communication with words is such a strange thing some times. It would seem, that some times, a thing said with honest intentions, even though on the surface 'wrong', can have the right logic behind it. It would seem, that some times, we forget to specify, or to take into account other understanding. We get hung up, and go in circles like a pinwheel in the wind, just because the sticking point, the 'pin', keeps us there. It could be one misunderstood word, something unintentionally misspoken, or a forgotten disclaimer, or any number of things.

Yes. I find, just in my experience, people find subjective to mean "wrong" or "invalid" or "doesn't exist". I don't like to use it this way. Some times I forget that other people do like to use it that way. Something subjective is still something. Some times we can talk about things which we don't have. But there is still the talking about the thing, otherwise we are not talking about a non thing.

Mystical and miracle, these are also relative and subjective perceptions. Calling something out of the ordinary depends on your view of ordinary. People say what they see (or feel, or whatever) and then take further steps to try to say how, why, and when it happens. Other people disagree, some times for sufficient reasons, other times not. There's knowing a thing. And then there's knowing a thing. The two often look the same but one is thinking you know for the wrong reasons. I think these are why debates happen, and I see nothing automatically wrong with it. Yes, 'dangers' are there, and wherever. Not everyone is ready to grasp everything all of the time, and some times what they think they have grasped is an illusion. It is possible to not understand one's own understanding, let alone someone else's and all to often we try to force it. There are different times for different things in differing amounts. One does not always need to say "It is a miracle!" Some times just saying "It is!" by itself is sufficient.

My take: Thinking is a 'what'. Critical is a modifier for a 'what'. Method is a 'how'. Creativity is a 'why'.

I feel this. Just a question... does it ever feel like every single molecule is flowing with boundless energy, and it just goes out and out, and gets bigger and bigger, to the point where you can no longer feel a body or container, as it is immensely larger than any space you could physically occupy?

I understand. I was being a little facetious. I don't know of an advantage to believing things without evidence off the top of my head. But I can think of plenty of cases where doing without evidence could be an advantage. We do without evidence every day. All the things that you don't know that aren't effecting you. Things that are present because they aren't there - lack of worry, lack of fear, lack of confidence, lack of considering the infinite because if you begin to consider the infinite, you can never finish.

Where is his evidence? That's a joke. Sorry. "Wrong" and "always" and "everywhere" and "anyone". Very powerful words. Words that some times get loose and bite us in the rear.

I think this is one of those things where explanation is not sufficient. If you have to ask, that's a good indicator to not do it in this case. I tried something similar once. Worst experience of my life. Was convinced that I was dying in the most horrible way imaginable to me. My advice, leave it. Other advice on this, even well intentioned, will not protect you.

Funny how some expect dogs to not only learn human language, but to listen when it is spoken as well.

Lovely. Decimal thing made me laugh. Anecdote that just happened, a minute or two ago. I (I'm using "I" and "My" in retrospect) stepped outside. My dad's wife came out, trying to get the dog to follow her outside. Dog wouldn't go, laid down in the door, wagging her tail and not listening at all. She asks me to call the dog. I do not call the dog... I do... something. I made a strange noise and took off running. Dog follows instantly. Free happiness. Feel connected to dog, but there was no dog and there was no me. It was beautiful.

My first inclination is to say something involving "I" and "My". My second inclination is to try to post without saying "I" or "My" My third inclination is to not post at all, because I think that is the right thing. My fourth inclination is to not interfere with myself. My fifth inclination is to interfere with myself anyway. My sixth inclination is to continue to fight with me because I think I am saying something. My seventh inclination is to just run away with my hands over my head. My eighth inclination is to not do that and remain. My ninth inclination is to let go of "My". My tenth inclination is to stop at ten because it seems interesting even though it is entirely meaningless. Ultimately: a man is at a keyboard typing things.

Good catch. I didn't specifically mean "the will of I" or the will for a thing. I mean more of "base motivation", or going with the flow as one might say. I admit that this part is quite confusing when we think in terms of self. And again a lot of it comes down to semantics. Like a flowing river, there is movement, flow, force in some places and yielding in others. I use the term 'will' because it is more than simple inertia, a thing under inertia needs nothing else to continue, but there are other inseparable things. Inertia isn't all it is, but it is included. I find that difficult to express without saying 'will' but I don't mean it in quite the conventional sense. If that makes sense.

One who aspires to make others right may mislead himself and others. One who aspires to make himself right may mislead others and himself. one who aspires to let other people lead him may be misled by other selves and his own self and in turn mislead others. One who aspires to remove himself from the equation may mislead himself and others into thinking he has removed himself and that others can remove themselves. Maybe one should not be quick to distinguish self from others and self from self in the first place.

Ah yeah. I have heard of this before, now that you put it that way. It is a wonder, isn't it?

I haven't heard this before, but I suppose (I'm guessing!) that it would have to be outside the event horizon. Black holes more than keep light from emitting, it loops into the black hole. This is why they are "black", not only can you not see it, you don't see anything behind it either. It looks like just a void. Light travels on geodesics, and from just my limited knowledge, basically the black hole bends these geodesics more and more the closer they are. Light traveling far to the side is not hardly effected, light that is a bit closer has the path bent slightly but it can still escape, and this increases the closer the lines get until the line just "falls in" the hole and can't come back out. Basically.