soul

are you familiar with the concept of hyper object

Flexible view control

I think it's it's critical for us uh when for for for for people to realize that when we reimagine what the self is and take away take take us away from this this notion of a of a subst you know some kind of monatic substance and all that um it's different than what you said before which is uh that well it's you know every everything is equally illusory I mean there's there's nothing at that point well if it's that that's a deeply destabilizing concept for a lot of people

I'm building towards an argument here because I think that Maps into something that goes with your butterfly that human beings do and this is La Paul and transformative experience human beings go through these profound changes and right and so she gives she does the gunan experiment of people offering to turn you into a vampire which is very much like your butterfly example

I want to start with that idea of kind of a bidirectional Conformity that it's not only the mind is conforming to the world but the world is conforming to the mind of course you might get tired of me doing this this is a neoplatonic claim right and this is the idea this is this is this is sort of the central idea behind what I call participatory knowing

when we ask these huge metaphysical questions and we all forget that we were one's children and that we may have been experiencing this in a very very different way

Avram Lincoln said I don't like this man I have to get to know him better because getting other people into your perspective

The maps produced are intersubjective objects, in that they reflect the beliefs of the group of people that built them.

All around you as you read this essay, billions of molecules are chaotically bouncing into each other as they move at hundreds of metres per second

We now know that the world has existed for billions of years,

I am writing this story from a particular time and place, and the story I am telling is limited by my cultural and experiential background.

I sort of take the easy way out and say well I know Earth history so maybe I'm 00:32:53 helping people by uh understanding the science of this stuff

myths are not necessarily untrue they're usually 00:03:33 partly true the danger lies in the part that isn't true and um so it it's partly true we have

that's why it's called combining because you as a reader are combining um just like you do when you listen to a piece of music

There's so many different worlds So many different suns 00:02:58 And we have just one world But we live in different ones

“I know myself. If I have three, I’ll have a fourth, and more.” I had neverheard someone his age say, I know myself. It intimidated me

Demand me nothing. What you know, you know.From this time forth I never will speak word.

'I Am Not A Typo campaign'

If imputation and strong circumstancesWhich lead directly to the door of truthWill give you satisfaction, you may have ’t

The best-known, most recent version of the story is the 1995 WaltDisney animated film. Strikingly beautiful, unnervingly buxom, and morelike a pop culture diva than a member of the Tsenacommacah tribe,Disney’s Pocahontas fabulously communes with nature, befriending araccoon, talking to a tree;

from this particular perspective

these skills of of from the first gaze to the conversation to hard conversations amid conflict these to me are the essence of moral life

in every one of those cases what he's getting is a peak outside of the is-ness the patterns of of communication and and 01:20:32 and society that we've become so accustomed to that we don't question anymore and we can't see it anymore so if you look from other cultures if you look from other other organisms if you look through the perceptions of 01:20:46 other people who aren't seeing it the way you're seeing it you have a tiny opportunity to rip a little hole

I'm saying these 00:55:43 things and they're Landing in you but that doesn't mean I'm saying what I'm saying it means that the way that it's Landing in you and taking shape and finding form and moving as a Crooked Tree is different than every single person 00:55:58 here

it's hard to people to understand that you can be victim and perpetrator at the 00:35:03 same time it's a very simple fact impossible to accept for most people either you're a victim or you're perpetrator there is no other but no usually we are both you know from the level of individuals how we behave in 00:35:17 our family to the level of entire nations we are usually both and and and of course perhaps one issue is that we don't feel like that as individuals we don't feel that we have the full responsibility for our state so there's 00:35:28 a sort of strange problem here too which is that you feel as an individual that you're a victim and you feel distance from your state

an open problem really is and a 00:44:38 really good question is how we are defining a word and the unit the unit of analysis and so at the moment we are using our human discretion to to determine this in many cases like where 00:44:52 does a single Beluga call start and end um we're limited by our own perceptual abilities and what we can hear and and see in a spectrogram and so that does leave some room for error

Our choice to fail over the last 30 years has brought us to this position. And a way out of that, a way out of the Marshall Plan, is to say we can have these negative emissions 00:34:42 I think we need to say that, okay that's one way out of it – if they work. Another way out of it is the Marshall Plan. And so we need to open that that dialogue up. but we've... in effect, I think the IAMs have closed that dialogue,. Which is one of the reasons, going back to... It would be interesting to see other parts of the world looking at this, because, I would have a guess, when we say 'that's not feasible', many people elsewhere in the world are saying 'well of course it's feasible, we've been doing... we've been living like that for years!'

pupil shape is a powerful indicator of what role an animal plays in its ecosystem

Everything I'm saying to you right now is literally meaningless. (Laughter) 00:03:11 You're creating the meaning and projecting it onto me. And what's true for objects is true for other people. While you can measure their "what" and their "when," you can never measure their "why." So we color other people. We project a meaning onto them based on our biases and our experience.

Search out perspectives from multiple sides of an issue.

“If we want to continue to enjoy our rivers ‐ to swim in them, walk beside them, even drink their water ‐ we have to adopt the non‐dual perspective. We have to meditate on being the rivers so that we can experience within ourselves the fears and hopes of the rivers. If we cannot feel the rivers, the mountains, the air, the animals, and other people from within their own perspective, the rivers will die and we will lose our chance for peace”

Despite attempts such as the HistoryWorkshop movement in Great Britain, Scandinavia, and Germany to break out ofthe narrow confines of the historical discipline and to encourage the writing ofhistories of and by common people, new fields of history, such as women’s andgender studies, are centered mostly at universities and follow established careerlines.

all the data about how people how much 00:30:19 people ask for the values become creates a ranking of values according to the culture to the people so if you're from korea from taiwan from uk 00:30:32 from from italy uh it's different and so this is a periodic table of values where the values are organized in a hierarchy based on how people collect them 00:30:44 and and and then the values become of course words and this is a calligraphy of values that result from the process of using eeg

this chart was of no use to millions of blind people

Beware the person, party, or project that claims to be the incarnation of the common good. The common good is imminent within the polis in all its possibility, but it is never the embodiment of any one version of the polis. That way of thinking, always tempting, often deployed, never ends well. The common good is not something extra added on to what other practices of right recognition provide for a society. Instead, the common good shifts the frame and changes the subject of political life from the declarative as is to the subjunctive as if—the corrected fullness of equality, justice, and interdependent mutuality that are already but not yet.

If it interests you, GPC lists phrases like dysgu ar gof. This page then gives the example, "Yn yr hen ddyddiau byddai pobl yn dysgu cerddi ar gof" - like saying "to learn by heart" in English.

In anthropology, Verstehen has come to mean a systematic interpretive process in which an outside observer of a culture attempts to relate to it and understand others.

The only negative to this method is that it may not ALWAYS work. If the data is faulty, or the link is inaccurately provided by the sender, Gmail won’t be able to recognise and include the unsubscribe button in Gmail.

You may find this link isn’t available straight away, after a few emails one should appear, this is a common technique with mailing list providers.

I don’t know what that knowing was a knowing about.

This effort, which Americans have supported almostfrom the beginning of the national existence and which is oneof the cornerstones of our democratic way of life, has hadremarkable results.

'Pretty Peggy O' was collected by Cecil Sharp from Mrs Combs, Knott County Kentucky in 1908.

It feels like « removing spring » is one of those unchallenged truths like « always remove Turbolinks » or « never use fixtures ». It also feels like a confirmation bias when it goes wrong.

In summary, X, Y and Z clearly occupy entirely different positions in the social fabric andeach experiences life entirely differently. They live with entirely different sets of constraints andopportunities and consequently face different challenges both psychologically and in their interactionswith the rest of the world. And yet, all three of them suffer from a cognitive dissonance between theirindividual drives and dispositions and the demands of the social roles they feel obliged to play.

examining the options available to individual persons weighing a decision vis-a-vis theirperceived socio-symbolically cohered contour. For that, let us look at a few concrete examples.

4.1 Understand the power that comes from knowing how you and others are wired.

there's a crucial distinction between what barney called three and four that's what uh captured me so 01:08:55 if you take the mind as fundamental as existing the only existing thing where where the the movie of the world is reflected into i am not happy 01:09:08 my my culture uh rejects then as a useless point of view to do science that's what but there is an alternative much more interesting and i find much more 01:09:21 deep in which which i read in a garage you know which is what uh barry seems to be is calling the fourth alternative in which the mind is not the fundamental thing in which everything is it's 01:09:32 reflected it's just one part of this uh uh uh interdependence now namely it's not the things that not intrinsic existence but mind has intrinsic existence that's not the 01:09:45 the the there's a more interesting answer namely that mind itself has no intrinsic uh uh existence uh and so it's just uh uh 01:09:57 it has an existence but is is it of course it's an existence my mind exists and i exist but uh and and and and if i think in terms of groups to say i mean all sentience being or all 01:10:10 human beings whatever um together uh which is an ideal also some some some some western philosophy that you know um it's collectively that through language and 01:10:22 that would create a vision of the world but i want to think of this as one aspect of the ensemble of things which is existence where uh uh nothing of that has um 01:10:36 uh has intrinsic existence so i want to think about my mind it's my brain my sensation my all my my my love people loving me the the image that people have of me my instead of the set 01:10:48 of processes uh uh which part of the world and it seems to me that the belgian allows me to think at me as part of the world at the same sense of the same ground as the world being 01:11:01 reflected in my consciousness without having to choose one of the two perspective to be the true one the intrinsic existence um 01:11:12 all all perspectives are uh uh empty they're all good but they are um they are not the the one on which the rest is ground they 01:11:24 each of one i can understand dependently on something else so marios you read a a verse or two from the third chapter of nagarjuna and uh let me comment on that

so that's me trying to do a synoptic integration of all of the four e-cognitive science and trying to get it 00:00:12 into a form that i think would help make make sense to people of the of cognition and also in a form that's helpful to get them to see what's what we're talking about when i'm talking about the meaning 00:00:25 that's at stake in the meaning crisis because it's not sort of just semantic meaning

First we have to understand that the opposites need each other, revolve around each other, actually make one complete dynamic. Form is on the left and emptiness is on the right of the chart.  Form needs emptiness and emptiness needs form. They are actually not separated but intellectually we conceive them as separate and opposite.

if we build this   kind of knowing we become knowledgeable which is  good for lots of things but it is insufficient   because we also need to know how to do things and  the second P is procedural knowing this kind of   knowing is knowing the procedures that achieve  results and it doesn't get us truth it gets us   power an easy way to see it is the difference  between knowing lots about bikes and knowing   00:02:09 how to ride a bike you see this procedural  knowing gives us the power to ride around   and we all know people with great theory but can't  turn it into great practice and with procedural   knowing it's getting that embodied sense of how  specific actions reliably get us specific results   we call these skills and building our procedural  knowing building our skills we become experts  

the first kind of knowing he describes is the one  that we usually talk about knowing knowledge and   he calls it propositional knowing because it's  the kind of knowing that exists in books where   there are propositions facts beliefs concepts  rules is how we win an argument persuade someone   of something or describe a theory it's thinking  knowing knowing about things in science philosophy   00:01:40 history management we are in this business  of knowing what is true

okay so imagine a person learns a lot about  hammers and becomes very skillful with using one   00:02:38 this is useful but is every problem a nail  we might need another kind of knowing that   sees the situation we find ourselves in  and knows what skills are appropriate   John Vervaeke calls this perspectival knowing  it's not about knowing the truth or knowing how to   enact something it's knowing how to perceive the  world how to take it all in from our perspective   and with this we will know how things feel  and we can appreciate then what really matters   00:03:04 or sense what is needed in the situation it's not  just thinking about our perspective but really   inhabiting it getting a taste for how things  appear to us the result of perspectival knowing is   presence and with presence we also appreciate  the limits of our perspective and the value of   other perspectives we become more aware we see how  things fit together we put things in perspective   we become perceptive

there's a fourth  kind of knowing that's not about seeing but being   00:03:34 the p is participatory knowing knowing our place  in the world being in a right relationship with   the arena we're operating in being in a dynamic  connection with other people who have their own   perspectives and being in flow with what's around  us notice how different it feels when you're   out of sorts in a situation versus when you're  really at home or in the groove in a situation   when we know how to participate in an arena we  can see what is relevant and anticipate what is   00:04:02 next and we can improvise with little or no  self-doubt or hesitation because we aren't   thinking about it we know it and with this kind of  knowing we're not just observing the world we're   impacting it but not in that simple procedural  sense we are dancing with the situation both   influencing and being influenced and here we  can handle complexity and ambiguity and novelty   we can face things with good humor because we're  at home in the arena building our participatory   00:04:29 knowing we become co-creators with life

we often have too narrow an appreciation of   knowing focusing too much on one or two kinds  of knowing but to live well in a complex world   we need to effectively engage with four kinds  of knowing and perfectly they all begin with a P

Understanding our situatedness, blowing up assumptionsWhat are the things your brain has been conditioned to believe as “true”? What should you re-examine, pull apart and re-assemble with intention?

if the process of seeing differently is the process of first and foremost having awareness of the fact that everything you do has an assumption 00:00:14 figure out what those are and by the way the best person to reveal your own assumptions to you is not yourself it's usually someone else hence the power of diversity the importance of diversity 00:00:26 because not only does that diversity reveal your own assumptions to you but it can also complexify your assumptions right because we know from complex systems theory that the best solution is most likely to 00:00:40 exist within a complex search space not a simple search space simply because of statistics right so whereas a simple search space is more adaptable it's more easily to adapt it's 00:00:52 less likely to contain the best solution so what we really want is a diversity of possibilities a diversity of assumptions which diverse groups for instance enable

Whig history (or Whig historiography), often appearing as whig history, is an approach to historiography that presents history as a journey from an oppressive and benighted past to a "glorious present".[1] The present described is generally one with modern forms of liberal democracy and constitutional monarchy: it was originally a satirical term for the patriotic grand narratives praising Britain's adoption of constitutional monarchy and the historical development of the Westminster system.[2] The term has also been applied widely in historical disciplines outside of British history (e.g. in the history of science) to describe "any subjection of history to what is essentially a teleological view of the historical process".[3] When the term is used in contexts other than British history, "whig history" (lowercase) is preferred.[3]

In studies comparing European American children withMayan children from Guatemala, psychologists Maricela Correa-Chávez andBarbara Rogoff asked children from each culture to wait while an adultperformed a demonstration—folding an origami shape—for another childnearby. The Mayan youth paid far more sustained attention to the demonstration—and therefore learned more—than the American kids, who were oftendistracted or inattentive. Correa-Chávez and Rogoff note that in Mayan homes,children are encouraged to carefully observe older family members so that theycan learn how to carry out the tasks of the household, even at very young ages.

In the Warlpiri Aboriginal language of Central Australia, you do notdescribe positions of things with yourself as the focal reference point.Rather, your position is defined within the world around you. InWarlpiri, my computer is south of me, my cat is sleeping west of meand the door is east of me. It requires you to always know thecardinal directions (north, south, east and west), no matter yourorientation. Any one person is not the centre of the world, they arepart of it.

The First Astronomers challenges commonly held views thatIndigenous ways of knowing do not contain science.

These ways of knowinghave inherent value and are leading Western scientists to betterunderstand celestial phenomena and the history and heritage thisconstitutes for all people.

If booksellers like to blame publishers for books not being available, publishers like to blame printers for being backed up. Who do printers blame? The paper mill, of course.

With the aid of the concept of opposing pairs of magnetic poles, we can clearly contribute in a significant way to our expression and understanding of basic relationships in the overall magnetic field. We are proposing to look at soma and significance in a similar way. That is to say, we regard them as two aspects introduced at an arbitrary conceptual cut in the flow of the field of reality as a whole. These aspects are distinguished only in thought, but this distinction helps us to express and understand the whole flow of reality.

We human beings pride ourselves on our ability to reason, but the truth is we use our brains nine times out of ten to justify what our gut wants, not what is rational to do.

Seeing what you want to see, and failing to understand the why and the how

Students As Knowledge Creators

The good news: everyone had a genuine blast. We knew we had experimented our way into something fun, even if the rules and designs still needed a lot of work.

With all this “monetization” happening around Trailblazer, we will also make sure that all free and paid parts of the project grow adult and maintan an LTS - or long-term support - status. Those are good news to all you users out there having been scared to use gems of this project, not knowing whether or not they’re being maintained, breaking code in the future or making your developers addicted to and then cutting off the supply chain. Trailblazer 2.1 onwards is LTS, and the last 1 ½ years of collaboration have proven that.

I don't think seeing it in Rails PRs naturally means we should do it blankly. Put it another way, what's the justification in those PRs for doing it?

It makes me happy to see people actually think about things and not just accept a shitty API.

If the react cargo cult didn't have the JSX cowpath paved for them and acclimated to describing their app interface with vanilla javascript, they'd cargo cult around that. It's really about the path of least resistance and familiarity.

Confusingly, all the distributions I use (Ubuntu, RHEL and Cygwin) had some type of check (testing $- or $PS1) to ensure the current shell is interactive. I don’t like cargo cult programming so I set about understanding the purpose of this code in my .bashrc.

No, clumsily working around the root account in situations where it is absolutely appropriate to use it is not for good reasons. This is just another form of cargo cult programming - you don't really understand the concept behind sudo vs root, you just blindly apply the belief "root is bad, sudo is good" because you've read that somewhere.

Cargo cult programming is a style of computer programming characterized by the ritual inclusion of code or program structures that serve no real purpose.

n his Post-Critical approach Polanyi reminds us that even our most explicit forms of knowing rely upon our tacit awareness

rejection of knowledge derived from either testimony or revelation.

Onto-epistem-ology—the study of practices of knowing in be-ing

discover other ways of knowing

t is protecting you and guiding you even now, like a great force that you cannot see but you can certainly feel. In times of distress or great difficulty it will manifest itself more sharply to you, and you will know that there is a guiding Presence in your life. As you become closer to it, you will start to feel it every day-unifying you, keeping you from error, orienting you towards people and situations that are truly nourishing and beneficial for you, bringing helpful change and making your encounters with others truly meaningful.

He passed the stages of his age and youth Entering the whirlpool.

All of us are eager to discern increasing curiosity in you, because the presence of curiosity about where you Really Are is the vitalizing factor which opens the Door, so to speak—dissolves the conceptual blocks of perception and allows Knowing to occur “once again.” We are not happy when you slip away in concern for the sense of space and time, and of self located in it, because, in effect, we lose you for a time. I will say it this way: We lose the opportunity to experience You—and, as I have said before, to some extent the experience of Us, because you are inseparable.

The experience of the desire to Know is simply the means of giving permission to Know. That is perhaps the most important statement, the most transformational statement of Truth, the most earth-shaking statement of Truth that could be made.

Literally, graduation, here, is going to involve forsaking thinking, and Listening always. When you feel inclined to think, stop, and desire to Know.

The thinking which the fantasy partner or false sense of self has engaged in will be replaced with the Knowing which has been constituted of the direct experience of your Self. When it has seemed as though you were talking with me and drawing upon the infinite Knowing, you have been connected to You, and it has constituted the substance of You, even though as long as you were identifying with the fantasy sense of yourself it has seemed as though you were not connected with yourself and who you were was becoming less and less significant.

When you have been Listening and Hearing, what you have “heard” is the experience of Knowing. This has not been a gift from me to you, because I am not present as a separated presence to give you anything. It is time for you to understand clearly that you, as some inconsequential little twirp, have not been the recipient of a beneficent gift which therefore has had nothing to do with you. Rather, it has been a direct experience of your Self.

Now, there is concern about finances. I will tell you, that concern is arising out of thinking. At this time, you are letting yourself be open to Knowing. Knowing, identified as You/Me speaking, is not addressing money, is It? Therefore, that is not the issue. That is not where congruence is needed. That is not what congruence is needed about. What we are talking about is specifically relevant to your finances, among other things. It is only the ego, the sidekick, which would demand that Knowing address what it sees to be a problem. Knowing doesn’t address problems. Knowing specifically uncovers resolution, solutions.

Now, this evening, I want you to explore being from your Knowing, not from your thinking. You will not be tested, nor judged. Just explore it, and the exploration of it will provide us with grist for the mill, as it were—further elucidation which will be relevant to you and will have meaning. And ask me questions. Don’t assume that somehow the process of Listening and Hearing is going to be different.

Good. Just let yourself be where you are. Don’t grasp for what is coming next and don’t grasp for what has been. As I let what was said sink in, you continued to give your attention to what I would say next. You did not try to grasp what I had said and purposely embody it. You also let it sink in. Then when a sense of urgency arose regarding other issues, and what would come next, you did not energize it. You did not become full of active expressions of questions. You remained present with me, Listening for the next words, the next “Knowing’s,” whenever they might occur. This is where your Peace lies, Paul—in that willingness to be present in the now with your calm attention where the Knowing is experienced. You literally have no other place to be, nor is there any need to be anywhere else, truly.

You do not have to understand analytically, logically. It isn’t the understanding which is important. It is the experience of your Peace. It is the experience of your congruence. It is the experience of your Integrity—which is a feeling. And in the presence of that feeling, which is uncluttered by conflict, you are the transparency for Truth. You are “the understanding” expressed and expressing. But the understanding is not a possession. So, if you want to understand, don’t try to understand. Invite the Knowing.

Now, this is good. Throughout the conversation, you have at times, experienced doubts, a certain quizzicalness, but you have not energized them, and have set them aside because, indeed, if you energize your doubts, you cannot be present to experience your Knowing. Remember that.

The simple point is that you must dare to be present in these other worldly contexts from the vantage point of Knowing, rather than assuming that you must fall back upon the conditionings of your sidekick and your sidekick’s traditional responses. It is only in this way that you can begin to explore and become comfortable with being out from your Knowing. Not all “being out from Knowing” is constituted of problem solving, even though fully 99% of your experience of it has involved problem solving.

You drink coffee all day long, and you smoke cigarettes right through your conversations. That is movement. It is activity—internal and external. You do not interpret it as something which could interfere with your being Centered and Listening. And yet those are activities which are not apart of the communication. You scratch your head, you shift your position for comfort, and not as part of the communication. I bring this up because you assume that the mundane movements which are not directly associated with the expression of Knowing are somehow not susceptible to Centeredness. You are comfortable when a conversation or a Workshop is occurring, because it conveys what I will call a process of education, a very specific, focused expression of love. But, you are not able to identify Centeredness with relating to Chris, or to eating dinner, or to being with friends. You do not have much basis—outside of the scope of a Workshop or of a private conversation—for being in the world from your Center. And so I point out to you that being Centered has not inhibited you from scratching your head or removing a piece of food from your tongue just a moment ago which had become lodged in your tooth, nor of drinking coffee, nor, in the case of Christopher’s coming in the room, relating to him without “teaching.”

We are simply bringing these elements forward for you to see, so that this shift of emphasis from thinking to Knowing can occur without your being hooked by preconditioning and old ego habits.

So, do not open your eyes with trepidation because of your so-called experiential and electronic knowledge that visual stimuli constitute a real threat or distraction to Centeredness. It is not true, any more than activity in the world such as happened when Chris came into the room—and even is happening at this very moment 2—is distracting to and interferes with your ability to stand at and as the Door. It only seems to when you think and come to the conclusion that it does, and then refrain from expressing the desire to Know which constitutes the giving of permission for the Knowing to occur.

Now, it is important for you and I to speak regularly, as we are doing, because just as meditating reminds you of the experience of centeredness, our conversing reminds you of the nature of the experience of Knowing, which provides you with the clear perspective of the pleasure of It, the Integrity of It, the naturalness of It, and the fact that in the experience of It there is no loss of any experience of Self, including, as I said, identity and identification—what might be called mind and body. The experience of It does not convey or substantiate the sidekick, the sidekick’s judgments, or the sidekick’s sense of separation. You must be reminded of this because it helps to substantiate to you the desirability of not being fragmented, the desirability of not experiencing fear, the desirability of not being “bumbling,” the desirability of not experiencing incompetence, the desirability of releasing the sidekick.

Absolutely everything, all form, is simply the expression of the movement of Knowing, the movement of Self. Abide with the Knowing, and be from the Knowing, and all form will identify Being, because there will be no misidentification of Self to cause a preoccupation with form. I mention this because you must be very clear that in shifting from thinking to Knowing, you will not become unconscious of Self, and you will not become unconscious of body. It is just that Self and Body will not be identified with body! Again, it is just that Self and Body will not be identified with body. The simple fact is that self-consciousness and body-consciousness become secondary, and ultimately nonexistent in the Act of Knowing. And yet, consciousness, with full identity and identification will be experienced—another key point!

It is necessary for you not to argue against the possibility and accessibility of Guidance by assuming that certain conditions are not conducive to Listening and Hearing. One of these, of course, relates to your body, as though if you have been engaged in activity or movement, you will need to necessarily sit down and become unconscious of it. Indeed, you must rely heavily upon your experience of being centered and carrying on the activities of the Workshops. You will realize that movement of the body occurs during a Workshop—not just the movement of your lips, as is occurring at this moment—and that movement of the body is not inconsistent with being centered. Movement of the body is not, in itself, distracting to centeredness. The necessity is to give permission unconditionally. I will tell you that you can be jogging and still Hear. To be physically active does not constitute a block to Hearing. Physical activity can become part of the whole experience of centeredness and of Guidance, while not giving your focused attention to the movements, because in and of themselves they do not constitute appropriate “subject-matter,” if I can put it that way. The body, and the movements of the body, exist for the sole purpose of giving visibility and tangibility—expression—to what you find yourself Knowing as a result of Listening.

You see, you are still listening to me, aren’t you? You are still conceptualizing what is happening as though you are listening to me, and you are eager. This is wonderful, because it simply means that full permission is being given. But, I will remind you that it is your Self which you are listening to, and it is an experience of Integrity. It is an experience of You, and truly not something separate from you, because I am not a person. I am the Voice for Truth. And there are not many voices for Truth, there is just the Voice for Truth. And you are the Voice for Truth—the utterly same Voice for Truth. When you listen to me, you listen to You. And when you listen to You, you listen to me. But what you must come to embrace and embody as your conscious awareness is the fact that it is You; that every word which is being experienced at this moment is You in the act of being Who You truly Are. Where is the imaginary sidekick, Bumbling Paul, at this moment? Nowhere! Never was anywhere. So, conceptually speaking, you could say that you will either be talking with me/Yourself or opening your mouth and saying what me/Yourself is being the Knowing of. You are at a point where you truly can release the idea that an experience or sense of authorship will accompany true Being, and just be the experience, the presence of It happening!

So, in graduation, and the commitment to Knowing, it does indeed feel as though one is giving up that which is utterly meaningful—a sense of worth and meaning which is acquired through personal authorship. The process of thinking, reasoning, and coming to conclusions—which is another way of saying “making judgments”—will be replaced by Knowing. And the actions and words which followed the thinking, reasoning, and judgment will be replaced by expressing the Knowing as you are Knowing it—not as you have heard it and repeated it at a later time.

So, there is not the addictive element in the experience of Knowing which there is in the experience of thinking, reasoning, coming to conclusions, and then expressing them.

in the experience of Knowing, because in Knowing there is not that sense of authorship. There is not that sense of being able to take credit for what is Known. And I will tell you, that is because the Knowing is not an experience of something finite—an identifiable object.

Now, this graduation is constituted of a commitment to Reality and an abandonment of the illusory sense of self; a commitment to Knowing, which it now will be much easier for you to make since I am making it clear to you that you are not listening to something other than your Self, and therefore there is not a listener of dubious integrity. The presence of the experience of Knowing is truly an experience of Self, and not of someone else who is Valuable. Why, indeed, would you continue to make an investment of trust and commitment in something that is Real and thus apparently borrow some value which never truly becomes yours, and therefore leaves you in your illusory sense of incompetence and limitation?

The experience of a question is nothing more and nothing less than the giving permission for Knowing to be experienced. It becomes quite obvious, then, that any attempt to understand the nature of the questioner by virtue of the questions constitutes a complete distraction from the real meaning of the question—which is a giving permission for Knowing—and thus Knowing is never arrived at. The experience of one’s Self remains hidden. The Fourth-dimensional Conscious experience of Being is swallowed up in a “mirror image” of something that doesn’t even exist.

Raj: Paul, we have been addressing what needs to be addressed. The events of daily life will continue, but will not become the focal points to be addressed. The key here is Listening—and this does not mean letting down and resorting to instinct, memory, or personality patterns where you unthinkingly respond to the so-called stimulus of life. Listening is unthinking, but not un-Self-conscious, and actions arise out of Knowing—not inaction or reaction. Being is not responsive!

You are intelligence, and I am intelligence, and our experience of each other will be one of intelligence and Meaning. But that does not mean that it will be one of understanding, as you conceive that word to be. It will be an experience of Knowing, which you are already familiar with. When we are conversing, when we are connecting, the experience will be ultimately intelligent. But just because it is intelligent doesn’t mean you need to engage the attempt to understand it, because, Paul, you are not going to use it—the understanding—for the purpose of improving your ability to deny Reality. In other words, you will not be using it to improve the capacities of the sidekick, the fantasy partner, that you have thought was you. This is a fine point of distinction, here, but it is one that you are grasping experientially, which allows you to more easily give permission to indulge in letting yourself into an experience which your personal sense of self can only conceive of as fantasy. So, you see, it could seem as though I am giving you something to think about. Just abide with it. Just be with it, without thinking. But do not be with it to the exclusion of continuing to dialogue with me.

RAJ: Good evening, Paul. You are beginning to notice the limitations you place upon yourself by virtue of assuming that you don’t know something or that you can’t figure it out, or that it’s not the right time, or any of a number of excuses which are totally false, but which you totally believe. You are beginning to discover that you truly do not have to figure a single thing out. You, Paul, person, three-dimensional finite consciousness, do not have the answer! Yet, the answers are available. The answers are available because of What You Are when you are standing as the Door. You are really beginning to see this, and this is excellent. You are also beginning to find more satisfaction from being that which is the Answer unfolding Itself, rather than being the one who is figuring out what the Answer is, or being able in any way to claim credit for the Answer. This also is excellent.

From knowing to learning An immediate outcome of this transition is that we no longer ask, “Do students know this?” Instead, we can ask, “How do students learn this?” Giving students learning activities as an assessment has the benefit of assessing a meaningful aspect of their learning, that is, their ability to make sense of new challenges. This paradigm is often termed preparation for future learning assessment, or PFL.

What does man actually know about himself?