Absolute proof of karma , gnosis, and eternity

[anew1]

Maybe so, but this is certainly NOT what I was thinking, talking about, implying, meaning, nor referring to at all.

[meno41 (William gundry)]

Again, the old and the new literally and figuratively express the certain congruence and such between the two, of what you intended to mean and what you imply has been on intended, albeit on your part. What was intended or not is beyond what the issue is precisely what it’s all about.

And that is, to be beyond the personality of what’s beyond, and that beyond that’s beyond the personality. That is why all the confusion of who is meant to be speaking to whom, because after all with a few exceptions, no one here, or in the Great Beyond is represented by a nominally staged signified word.

So in essence the essential body of signification has reached the level of alluding to ‘higher’ forms of metaphors, and the irony in using higher-metaphor is an obvious irony, because myths are lower spatial-temporal regions. Which are absolutely reducible to function as if they did correspond or mutually reflect.

[anew1]

Okay, again, to me,

@anew1

When the word ‘karma’ is defined as a universal law of cause and effect where intent and actions influence the future, then the fact that Existence Itself cannot be refuted is absolute proof of ‘karma’.

When the word ‘gnosis’ is defined as knowledge; awareness; insight, then the fact these things exist and cannot be refuted is absolute proof of ‘gnosis’.

When the word ‘eternity’ is defined as forever, temporally, then the fact that the Universe could not have a finite duration is absolute proof of ‘eternity’.