How can this plum I'm holding have been not a plum for infinity, but is a plum now? Makes no sense. Clearly it is infinitely a plum.

▲

hshshshshsh 5 days ago | parent [-]

There is nothing called plum. All there is experience. Changing experience. Appearing in awareness. The awareness is constant. Among time. Only constant.

▲

margalabargala 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

I dunno, I'm holding this thing and I'm calling it a plum. Also, I was definitely not aware when sleeping last night, so that doesn't seem right either.

▲

qualeed 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

While I understand each of the words you have written, I have no idea what you are trying to say. What would you suggest I do with this information?

I get the impression that you were trying for something cryptic and profound sounding, but went a little too overboard and lost the underlying message, leaving the reader trying to decipher a bunch of meaningless 2 to 4 word sentences.

▲

mapontosevenths 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

He's saying that the plum is not infinite because the plum is not real, only the perception of the plum is real and implying that the same is true of time.

It's an argument that is akin to, but not the same as, "the map is not the territory."

▲

hshshshshsh 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

The master appears when student is ready.

But if you are serious look into advaita or madhyamaka.

▲

qualeed 5 days ago | parent [-]

My kid sometimes says stuff like this when trying to impress people. It's a phase I'm excited for them to grow out of.

Oh, you've now edited your comment from calling yourself a "master" to something else entirely (while still not answering the question I asked).

▲

hshshshshsh 5 days ago | parent [-]

Sure. There is three possibilities.

I am writing to impress you anonymous stranger. Maybe for karna farming. Or to inflate my ego.

Or maybe there is a pointing that you can't grasp yet that inan trying to convey.

Or I am full of shit.

▲

margalabargala 5 days ago | parent [-]

Part of being knowledgeable about something, is being able to convey that thing to others.

Thus, of your three options, two are much more likely, and one much less likely.

▲

hshshshshsh 4 days ago | parent [-]

See. I am not here to teach anyone

I have told what I think is true from my understanding.

If you don't understand it or thinks it's bs it's fine. Just leave it.

My goal is not to awaken any of you.

I just posted it because it felt true to me.

And if someone else resonated that's good enough.

I understand when you say it sounds BS and empty.

I would have said the same a few years back.

And I don't think anything I have written could have changed that opinion.

You see the words just appear as patterns to you.

The meaning is generated internally.

▲

margalabargala 4 days ago | parent [-]

Whatever LLM you're using to write these responses, whether software or organic, you should know anything released in or after 2022 writes more coherently...

Nothing in what you wrote makes sense. Do you know what a double negative is?

▲

hshshshshsh 4 days ago | parent [-]

Haha. That's okay. I am not trying to make sense to you. As I mentioned above.

But you can always copy paste my replies to your modern LLMS and ask what I am talking about. Maybe they can settle for sure I am full of shit..

▲

margalabargala 4 days ago | parent [-]

See, that's how we know you're lying. You've contradicted yourself in practically every comment you've written, so if anything you saying you're not trying to do something elsewhere, means you're doing the opposite now. Were you lying then or lying now? So everything breaks down.

The question is settled; a software LLM is not needed.

	▲	hshshshshsh 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		If you say so. So be it. You are focused on trying to understand truth through axioms which you have already assumed to be be true. Can't you see the contradiction?