Timeless questions

[Faceless]

To end time actually then the timeless is. To understand the timeless, time must be understood very deeply. If time is not understood and observed in oneself then it will continue to inslave the center. We have see the whole of this movement and end it all at once. Unless this happenes one can not ‘understand’ that which is timeless.

To embody timelessness their will be no recollection what so ever. Their will be no distinctions made between one thing and another. Their will be no reference points any longer. At this point experience doesn’t even exist. When the known is not, their will no longer be any point of view. 

Edited April 25, 2018 by Faceless

[Faceless]

One thing that helps is identifying movements of time. So when they arise you can be aware of such movements.?

Edited April 25, 2018 by Faceless

[tsuki]

42 minutes ago, Sevi said:

this is true for understanding 'something'; then my question is what would be the methodology or the way (or the tool-s) to understand "the understanding" if not by observing it?

If methodology for understanding understanding was different from understanding 'things', then it would imply that it 'lies' in another realm of being than ordinary things that are subject to it. We would then have two different kinds of understanding: the one for understanding things and the other for understanding understanding. I think that it's a big problem for self-actualization. Aren't we trying to understand ourselves here? How do we suppose to achieve that if we have different kinds of understanding for different kinds of beings? 

How are we supposed to understand ourselves if we can't even understand what we're trying to do?

1 hour ago, Sevi said:

And?, by finding ignorance, do you mean, to find out what we are ignoring; or to find some reasons/excuses for yourself to ignore? Like using posting to distract yourself?

I'm posting to find my own stupidity. Ignorance. Dumbness.
Writing your thoughts down and really trying to see how stupid they are is not a waste of time.
I do not have a position to defend. I genuinely don't know. Writing my thoughts down helps me clarify and understand my position so that I can transcend it. It is how I grow.

1 hour ago, Sevi said:

would it be fair to say that you value the surprise factor? This aspect even didn't come to my mind at all in relation to this subject.

Yes, but I don't think that it is more important than knowledge. Let me explain:
I'm a mechanical engineer. Understanding how things work keeps me fed and clothed.
The problem is that if I understand too much, I'm blind to things that never happened before.
I never know what I don't know. Knowing is important, but so is openness to novelty,

Calling this feeling of not-knowing surprise may have not been the best move.
Sometimes it's fear. Sometimes it's surprise. Sometimes it's curiosity. Sometimes it's anger.

When I don't know things happen. Things that I couldn't have foreseen. Sometimes it's good and sometimes it's bad.
I prefer not to make such distinctions.

1 hour ago, Quanty said:

troll 

Here, have a flower:

[tsuki]

1 hour ago, Faceless said:

To end time actually then the timeless is. To understand the timeless, time must be understood very deeply. If time is not understood and observed in oneself then it will continue to inslave the center. We have see the whole of this movement and end it all at once. Unless this happenes one can not ‘understand’ that which is timeless.

To embody timelessness their will be no recollection what so ever. Their will be no distinctions made between one thing and another. Their will be no reference points any longer. At this point experience doesn’t even exist. When the known is not, their will no longer be any point of view. 

It is strange how you speak of not making distinctions while talking about 'time' and 'center' and their relation to each other.
Language is a strange thing indeed.

You will have to tell me more about this relation, as I'm not familiar with your personal philosophy of timelessness.
I may be aware of things you speak about, but my words for these concepts may be different and we will miss each other.
I remember talking about these things with you in the past (  ), but what you say now seems more nuanced, so I'm not sure that I understand you.

[Faceless]

5 hours ago, tsuki said:

Knowing is important, but so is openness to novelty,

 

???

 

Edited April 25, 2018 by Faceless

[Sevi]

41 minutes ago, tsuki said:

If methodology for understanding understanding was different from understanding 'things', then it would imply that it 'lies' in another realm of being than ordinary things that are subject to it. We would then have two different kinds of understanding: the one for understanding things and the other for understanding understanding. I think that it's a big problem for self-actualization. Aren't we trying to understand ourselves here? How do we suppose to achieve that if we have different kinds of understanding for different kinds of beings? 

How are we supposed to understand ourselves if we can't even understand what we're trying to do?

I'm posting to find my own stupidity. Ignorance. Dumbness.
Writing your thoughts down and really trying to see how stupid they are is not a waste of time.
I do not have a position to defend. I genuinely don't know. Writing my thoughts down helps me clarify and understand my position so that I can transcend it. It is how I grow.

Yes, but I don't think that it is more important than knowledge. Let me explain:
I'm a mechanical engineer. Understanding how things work keeps me fed and clothed.
The problem is that if I understand too much, I'm blind to things that never happened before.
I never know what I don't know. Knowing is important, but so is openness to novelty,

Calling this feeling of not-knowing surprise may have not been the best move.
Sometimes it's fear. Sometimes it's surprise. Sometimes it's curiosity. Sometimes it's anger.

When I don't know things happen. Things that I couldn't have foreseen. Sometimes it's good and sometimes it's bad.
I prefer not to make such distinctions.

Here, have a flower:

@tsuki by looking at the emotional tone of your post, it doesn't seem like you are searching some ideas with an objective mind. If you'd like to post what actually is bugging you, it would be a much more efficient conversation.

It seems that you also sent a bit of a sarcasm with the flower. Sure. Thank you anyways.

[Faceless]

4 hours ago, tsuki said:

It is strange how you speak of not making distinctions while talking about 'time' and 'center' and their relation to each other.
Language is a strange thing indeed.

You will have to tell me more about this relation, as I'm not familiar with your personal philosophy of timelessness.
I may be aware of things you speak about, but my words for these concepts may be different and we will miss each other.
I remember talking about these things with you in the past (  ), but what you say now seems more nuanced, so I'm not sure that I understand you.

We are using words to communicate so distinctions are necessary. But in the actual experiential part distinctions are not necessary. As their are none ?

And it may be a philosophy to you. To me this is a fact. I live it?

Edited April 25, 2018 by Faceless

[Faceless]

@tsuki

Yes I noticed our words are different so we would have to confirm what we mean by them. 

If I were to sit down and take more time writing this It might be a little clearer but not much. My son demands to much attention so I am limited on how much ‘time’ I can spend getting into it.....

Distinctions are the result of time itself. Words are the result of time ‘thought’..So in order to communicate the movement of time is necessary. 

Words can not capture anything that isn’t time bound such as the timeless. I have simply to the best of my ability tried to communicate that which can not be communicated?

The absolute most efficient way to communicate this is not to say anything?

Does that post I wrote present any confusion that I could undress? 

If so give me one at a time. That’s how I like to  communicate. 

Edited April 25, 2018 by Faceless

[Arkandeus]

10 hours ago, tsuki said:

@Arkandeus I really like your answer. You say that the point of questions is enjoyment.
Don't all questions come down to one proto-question: what is the point of something? Where does it lead?
The problem starts when you ask: what is the point of having a point? This is the moment when questions become self-aware, like we are.

Am I the understanding of things? Can I not understand myself?
Do I understand things that are whatever they are, or is it that all there is is what I understand? Or is it both, at the same time?

the moment you ask a question you have already evolved, the moment you understand something you have evolved, your questions involving that understanding have evolved

any question or answer is primitive, outdated, the moment its asked or understood, yet it is the on these very same questions and answers that we bloom a new being

what is a question and what is an understandibg when we keep expanding as infinitely as the universe does, and just as fast

 

[tsuki]

@Faceless @Sevi @Arkandeus
Now I understand. Answering questions is not an answer.
Thank you for bringing me back to this place.