On 24 March 2011 16:06, YouWho? <[email protected]> wrote: > Nice try Sandeep. > > Mark, you're missing the points being made. >
Okay thank you The frame of reference is from the point of view try to understand and > explain the vast mysteries of dreamdoms. > Why do we need to explain them cannot contentment even bliss be found in not knowing what is being imagined or why? > The dream character who takes the dream to be true can never really > explain the significance or lack of significance of the dream(let > alone Consciousness) from the perspective of taking himself to be a > dream character. Every attempt will only be dream explanations > pointing to aspects and nuances of the dream, and not dream > explanations pointing to awakeness. > Okay, got that, I was saying something else. > Both types of explanations can only happen in the dream, but the two > types of dream pointers are pointing at different things, or no- > things, as the case may be. > Okay > You really do have to drop your frame of reference, or everything you > think you know to be able to truly understand. Even just setting it > aside for awhile will do. Accumlated knowledge and ingnorance can both > be set aside for the purpose of more subtle exploration and > understanding. They can always be picked back up again if deemed > necessary. > Sure If you remain so rigidly sure that what you know is what is true, you > do not avail yourself of finer and subtler understanding. > I have no idea what is true and would suggest my not knowing might be access to knowing something what you got :) > My comment that you asked to have explained more clearly, clearly > stands on it's own and really needs no further explanation, only > exploration. I'm not just being critical or trying to offend, it's > just that the dialogue cannot really progress when instead of a > discussion based in the spirit of exploration and a meeting of the > minds, it merely reflects reactions based upon what you believe to be > true. > I don't believe anything to be true though it is obvious what is not true but I am not calling it the truth > > Because of that, I was just going to leave it, and not respond your > fantasy warfare style of discoursing, but as Sandeep did put in the > energy to try to clarify, it seemed the least I could do to speak my > mind. :O) > Thanks > > You don't see it(yet) but your responses show clearly why I would not > buy a book about Consciousness from a dream character who doesn't > really understand the dream or Consciousness. No offense intended. > > > Absolutely none taken and thank you, ultimately the book will be about you There is no dream only what is happening And what is there to understand about consciousness? Does a tree understand (itself falling perhaps) Or an ocean? Or a wave? Only human beings seem intent on caring what is what and the book is not about that - though I am sure you will find a meaning in it anyway :) Thanks Mark
