No, @Wakanyugi, am not offended at all, and I don't intend to offend you either.

My point is though you've used a referent 'tycho', the other intended 'referent' - 'reality' or 'non illusion' doesn't exist. It can't exist in your argument. You can't say anything, or do anything. But that's an impossibility. There'll always be something. And it will always be named.

And this again applies to the matter of both transcending and affirming separateness. I'll give you a practical example; knowledge and change in knowledge over time. Knowledge is expressed in a language, a transcendance of the seperate elements of the language.

Just like it's said in mathematics, an instance must presuppose a general condition. Seperateness and non-separateness existing and working at the same time.

I'll also give a more visible example. If one examines the proposed time line, at say, at any given interval, he/she will see that overally, human history has been about integrating and disintegrating, at the same time. Like now when globalization has become more intensified and multiculturalism is pressing, the number of new states is rising, and right wing politics of seperation are rising.

System integration and entropy at the same time, despite identity. Energy transmuting.

Muriel, what makes you think am stubborn? And, in simple terms, what's @Wakanyugi saying?

Then if, you get what he's saying, why aren't you agreeing with him?

Yes. I have. Have you just taken it?

lol.

Hello there Mtu Biz.

I always like reading what you have to communicate. Go on.

Yoúr tone is interesting...

In summary.

Altered states of consciousness by any method, psychedelics,meditation/yoga,hypnosis etc make the human mind highly suggestible...remember the south african pastor who made his congregation eat grass ?
The only and i mean the only 'philosophy' that consistently advises against this kind of contact with 'the other side' is found in the Bible.

There are no longer rituals, steps, incantations to make to interface with God, God cannot be conjured up by any man made methods. The only ticket to an audience with God is a contrite heart and a broken spirit.

Once upon a time, everything was picture perfect.. the age of innocence..man in perfect harmony with God and nature...

Until the allure of a wisdom and a knowledge that would put man on equal footing with God sold by the ancient serpent was believed..

"You will not surely die, for when you eat of the fruit, your eyes will be opened and you will be like God, knowing good and evil"

The result.

The world as we know it.

Back to Ayahuasca
There is a reason why DMT cannot be naturally digested by the human body.

What will you believe Tycho?

I did digress...poleni.

My two cents on this Juche issue.(after reading wikipedia)

It is simply one of the many ways we as human beings try and make sense of or create context to our existence.

It is a religious system.

My challenge to all, since it is clear from history and current affairs that no 'answer' has yet been found to permanently solve humanities basic issues.. disease, death, inequality, crime, poverty, etc
North Korea is certainly not utopia.

Is it not plausible that the context of our existence past present and future presented in the Bible is True?

Hi Tycho,

When I was away I can see the discussion has moved on in some interesting directions. To avoid causing distraction I'll make this a quick one.

My point and I have tried to be consistent, is that time and space are inventions of the human mind. They are tools that we have created, perhaps because we need them to function in 3D reality, another invention. Otherwise they have no basis in actual fact.

Some proof:

One thing Quantum theory has shown, over and over again is that the sub atomic world does not recognize the existence of time and space and particles or waves here are not bound by these conventions. Why should space-time exist in the macro world then, seeing as it is based on the micro?

If you take the premise of -non spacetime- as a given, then your case, built as it is on the concepts of history, timelines, change etc fails completely. Are we together?

I am in agreement with you as far as your post. Even Korean Juche recognizes that. The question is, even if what you're saying is true, so what?

That's where we are.

I had to go back to your first post to respond, I picked only one point:

While I do not decry your attempt to 'uplift' the people of Africa, God knows they have been down-lifted long enough, it still remains little more than misplaced racial ego pampering.

Achieving Unity is the responsibility of all, not just Africans. And, in this equation, the African is not a weakling.

Think about this story:

"Two brothers decided to go on a journey. There destination was a far away city, one they had never visited before. To reduce the risk of failure, they agreed that each brother would take a different route.

The younger brother took what clearly seemed to be the easier route, one where material comforts were available; where he only had to think of himself and the moral constraints of the journey did not matter too much. He could even exploit his older brother and get away with it.

The other brother took a much more difficult route, one full of want and uncertainty. In addition he decided to look out for others interests before his own, even those of his exploitative younger brother. He never forgot that, for their objective to be attained, both brothers had to arrive at the city of their desire. Both must succeed or none will.

Which brother would you say is stronger than the other? Which brother is most in need of help, the weak one or the strong one?"

If both brothers chose, and arrived at the city of desire, then both are equal in strength.

Help? Both, equally.

It's not about 'uplifting' the African, it's about the African getting conscious of himself and identity. And consciousness is a knowledge process, action.

So the matter at hand is what's there for us to create, considering our collective situation, and 'individual' situation.

It's about making tools, out of what's known. But on what grounds does this knowledge and truth stand?