and

Member
  • Content count

    3
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About and

  • Rank
    Newbie

Personal Information

  • Location
    United States
  • Gender
    Male
  1. You should probably check out my "recent" post post: "Experience, Proper Perception, And The Proper State Of Mind" ... most of those supposed "sideaffects" are merely the result of action during a laborious trust of assumption.
  2. Ask this question in search of a factual answer: "Am I obligated to discard other awarenesses so as have the awareness I seek?" Example: A person studies their textbook yet demands silence from those in the library. Are they obligated to lower their awareness of their surroundings so as to have more awareness of the material in the textbook? "Am I obligated to discard other awarenesses so as have the awareness I seek?" and... is the manner of gaining awareness to decrease awareness? My hypothesis is that you can't be aware of both something's antithesis and itself. In oder to be aware of truth you cannot focus on lies and in order to focus on lies you cannot be aware of truth. So, at times, you may indeed be obligated to discard some awareness so as to gain other awarenesses.
  3. Anything asserted based on more than a combination of personal experience and very solid inference requires chance to be correct or else is mere assumption. The proper state of mind cannot be inspired by assumption nor is it the product of assumption. That is why one who sees a hologram should only believe that which they experience; for if they have not touched it and found it to be solid and nonetheless assert to themselves that it is solid, that is inessential information based on assumption. In fact, even if you haven't touched your numb arm but you can see it, do not assume it is more than something seen. Even hallucinations are very ordinary. A magicians trick is very explainable because it in fact happened and impossibility has never happened. The seemingly extraordinary is birthed the same way as a concept; it is rather psychological; the ordinary can completely explain the seemingly extraordinary. Now, An imagination is formed by craftily rearranging existence. A unicorn is perhaps formed by combining a horse, a horn, and he colors of the rainbow. Concepts are formed similarly but by using words. The intention to do the impossible is able to be formed, but it may not be profitable. Even if you haven't touched your numb arm but you can see it, do not assume it is more than something seen. Hallucinations are also very ordinary. Miyamoto Musashi one said, "People in this world look at things mistakenly, and think that what they do not understand must be the void. This is not the true void. It is bewilderment." Therefore, supposed "nothingness" is merely that which is not understood by some. Don't disbelieve that which you can't understand. Experience is only ever realistic, but assumptions only dig a deeper pit of confusion. When confused, the technique for clarity is to resort to the basics which have been validated by experience (much the same way as the hologram and numb arm example). Treat things like a hologram or numb arm you haven't touched but merely see, do not assume it is more than sight. [Trust only the likes of that which you know by experience and require proof or else do not be concerned with the matter. The extraordinary is merely ordinariness, though rearranged craftily; because impossibility has never happened.]