It's time to wake up!

a reply to: daskakik

It doesn't necessarily need to be a scientific term. If it is logical and it had proof behind it then it's good to go.

It does sound like it would apply in most material situations.

When wouldn't this law apply?

a reply to: Andy1144

Well it isn't logical because we don't know "everything" so you can't say "everything" is this, that or the other.

Science is just data collected to date. Who knows what might be discovered in the future.

a reply to: daskakik

It's a fixed law. The same way you can't destroy or manipulate nothing (complete empty space).

EDIT: It applies to everything. That's not the same as knowing everything. But nice try.

But of even if that is true, do you know what your next thought will be before it happens or does it just happen completely by itself?

Hard evidence is I have no idea what the next word will be that I am about to type. The brain is doing all of that, and there is no on separate from the brain doing it.

Also science and hard evidence say there is no free will free from circumstance. Saying there is free will cannot possibly mapped on into any coherent reality.

so you can't say "everything" is this, that or the other.

We can know some fixed rules for sure. Like it is impossible to be conscious of being unconscious.
This applies to free will as well as it is impossible to have it.

Who knows what might be discovered in the future.

So no matter what science discovers in the future they will never discover that you can be conscious of being unconscious because that is impossible.
I am telling you of what I can be completely sure of.

dp

a reply to: Andy1144

Should have known better.

Ok, whatever.

a reply to: Andy1144
Have you seen this short David Bohm talk? I have posted it on another thread.

David Bohm was an American scientist and speaks about how thought has created a 'self centre' - thought creates an illusion and then everything that thought produces is based around this false idea - which makes every thought about yourself wrong and every thought about everything wrong - which in turn makes thought become a dangerous and destructive instrument.

a reply to: daskakik

All I said was, I don't know everything, but I do know dome fixed rules and explained clearly why and all you say is , ok whatever. How can you have a fruitful discussion with that mind set?

a reply to: Itisnowagain

I haven't seen it before, typical description of the illusion of self which is good. I've been exploring more the direct pointing method and manifestation these days.

a reply to: Andy1144
Can you tell me what you mean by 'direct pointing method and manifestation' please?

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Yes. Direct pointing method is a direct inquiry into the nature of self. Some examples of this can be:
Do you know what you next thought will be before it happens?
Is there any division between sounds heard? Between sensations? Ect ect.

Manifestation, is learning to manifest anything based on your level of excitement. But the excitement need to be genuine, not ego based.
www.youtube.com...

He says your life can become an ecstatic explosion of almost mind blowing synchronicity if your ego will gets out of the way and you can surrender and find what truly excites you.

Abraham Hicks talks about this as well but in a more expanded way.

www.youtube.com...

Here he talks about the 4 fixed laws of the universe.

While we can't empirically prove he is an actual extra terrestrial I can verify for sure that what he is saying about creating your reality is genuine and differes from new age teachings which he himself also bashed.

ETA:
nobodysnotes.com...

originally posted by: Andy1144


He says your life can become an ecstatic explosion of almost mind blowing synchronicity if your ego will gets out of the way and you can surrender and find what truly excites you.

Seeking is still happening - it is the seeking that has to stop for the seeker to get out of the way.
The belief that there is more to be got is what keeps the 'seeker' alive.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Of course. From reading my post did you get the impression that it is driven by seeking for some future salvation?

a reply to: Andy1144
It seems from what was written that there is an idea that there is something better to get.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

No, it seen there is no where to go. However, duality is embraced fully. It is seen that one can pursue goals and follow excitement, all the while knowing there is truly no where else to go but now. It's just pretend. Doing for the sake of doing. Did you read the nobodysnotes link?

This sort of language I am speaking deals with the relative aspect, which is duality. Not the absolute that all there is, is now. That makes it seem as if there is seeking happening. But it's really just a different language/perspective. We can still talk about concepts like better or worse and use them as tools but they are illusions. Ultimately untrue, only relatively appear as if they are.

a reply to: Andy1144
I am watching the Bashar 4 laws vid at the moment - I will check out nobodys notes later - thank you for the links.

originally posted by: Andy1144
How can you have a fruitful discussion with that mind set?

My point is made.

I don't care to have the discussion that you are looking for.

a reply to: daskakik

But your point was wrong.

Well it isn't logical because we don't know "everything" so you can't say "everything" is this, that or the other.
Science is just data collected to date. Who knows what might be discovered in the future.

I never said I knew everything. I just said we can know a few fixed rules which are unchangeable, like it is impossible to be aware of being unaware. The rest is up to science to discover, who knows what will be discovered in the future, but the law of it is impossible to be conscious of being unconscious will always be constant. It's fool proof knowledge.

a reply to: Andy1144

Not that point.

a reply to: daskakik

Then.. which one.

ETA: See it's so difficult because your changing topics so rapidly it's hard to keep track about what we're talking about.