The "self"-experience, about

[convel2]

Hello,

this is an article wich name is translated to "The "self"-experience, about", the original name in Norwegian is ""Jeg"-opplevelsen, om", it (this article) is the main text-part of the article by the same name, wich also is an article in it self. This is my (first) attempt to translate it from Norwegian to English.

This article/text is from this source/forum (Martinusforum) free to use in the same way as free books (or free articles), wich means that I give it away for free and anyone can make as many copies as he or she wishes. Also, I have the copyright of this article and no one else has had it before.

Have a good time reading.

Best regards, Markus Gyltnes (nickname "convel").


--- Line-space, the article/text follows below this line. ---



The "self"-experience, about.

The understanding: The conclusion can be formulated as following. "I, myself, am nothing of what I experience".
   The reasoning: The "self" is the, single, individual, or the part of (the single) individual, that experiences something, or things, and what it experience is something it has (the experience) and not is, so it is, the "self", not what, or nothing of what, it experience.
   The "self" is not it's own experience, it is something it has, or that whom it belong, and what it experience, the experience, exists as something "outer" while the unexperiencable "self" exists as something "inner" and is unexperiencable as, or which is logically connected together with that, the "self" experiences something that it (the experience) is something it (the "self) is connected to and not identical with, or the same as, but separated from another in "unitary" meaning, or as two different existing units.

Word explanations/use:
The "self" (the (single) individual, the (single) person, used about the part of the (single) individual that experiences, and not the other parts of the (single) individual's structure, or componance).
The experience, experience(s) (to experience, what (that wich) one experience).
Connected (connected together with one another).
"Unitary thinking", separated (different parts, units).
Belongs, has/have (ownership (by an individual)).
"Outer" (on the outside of (further determined; the "self")).
"Inner" (something that is on the inside of the experience (farther in) (m1), content ("content" of the person; the "self").


Explanations of meanings used in the text.

The "self"-experience: The "experience" of one self, the awareness of one self, the knowledge, or the acknowledgement, of ones own existence, as a "living" conceptiousness (m2), not just as theory.

"I am nothing of what I experience": "I am nothing of "what" I experience", where "what" includes persons as well as objects.

The "self" is the living "creature", or, as in the text used as beknowner of, the living "creature"'s experience - and create - "kernel".

That what it experience is something it has, means that the "self" not self is it's own experience, but that it is something that whom it belongs - the "self".


(m1): Minuscle number 1 - here inside of the experience means farther in than the experience.
(m2): Minuscle no. 2 - I'm not sure whether conceptiousness is an existing word or not in English, but it is composed by "conceptious" wich here means "to be at concepts" and "ness" wich here makes up the meaning to have a (clear) grasp of whatever is "to have concept of" (again from "to be at concepts"). I hope this makes the meaning of the word (conceptiousness) clear enough.



Markus Gyltnes, 2008-2010.



--- Line-space, the article/text ends above this line. ---

[convel2]

Hello,

this is a text wich name is translated to ""How to do things" (theoretical support to "make things done")", the original name in Norwegian is ""Hvordan gjøre ting" (teoretisk støtte til å "få gjort" ting)". This is my (first) attempt to translate it from Norwegian to English.

This article/text is from this source/forum (Martinusforum) free to use in the same way as free books (or free articles), wich means that I give it away for free and anyone can make as many copies as he or she wishes. Also, I have the copyright of this text and no one else has had it before.

Have a good time reading.

Best regards, Markus Gyltnes (nickname "convel").


--- Line-space, the text follows below this line. ---



"How to do things" (theoretical support to "make things done").

Short article about the psychological aspect of action, that to do things. Goes through thought/inner steps that are general, or uniform, for an actionpattern. Does not go through any specific actions, but does go through the general thought/inner steps of actions, or course of actions.


"How to do things" (theoretical support to "make things done").

Keywords/overview over procedure:
Make a deciscion.
Begin (start, go ahead).
Keep the action going ("keep things running") - despite; that other things are being done along the way and then simultaneously (with the beforementioned - "the action" going), disturbances that here, that is in this general case are overcommen/endured, and temporary diverions, which makes the task end up in the memory, accordingly a temporary, and not a complete break ("I'm coming back to it"). Other forms of intervention (interferrance) in the action (act) leads to break in the progress (course) that is is counted as breaks that lead to "that to have to start all over again", as they fall out of the patterns (the ones mentioned above) where the action's (act's) progress (course) is kept. These are cases where the goal is given up - temporary or completely, and not only set aside (and ends up in the memory) in advantage of something temporarily more important.
Succeeding course of events: The action (act) is done and gets an automatic ending, or is stopped by one having changed one's mind.


What happens when one give up.

Except that what one had on one's mind to do not is done, according to the plan, or not at all, one enter an action-pattern without underlying, clear plans wich implies following more or less "random", if one believe in randomness, forces, that is sources of inspiration that in worst case can lead into pitfalls, that is something of indirect and/or direct unpleasant nature, something harmless but useless, or in best case something purely good that is both pleasant and/or useful. This unless one falls back to earlier plans, or get oneself over to new.



Markus Gyltnes, 2009, 2010.



--- Line-space, the text ends above this line. ---

[Lasse]

Hi Marcus,

Thanks for the article

What about checking out the terms used in the english translations of Martinus' work? The translater of most of the books has also made the short symbol descriptions on www.martinus.dk/en. I think that symbol 8 could be of interest. See http://www.martinus.dk/en/martinus-symbols/overview-of-the-symbols/symbol-8-9-10/.

Best regards,
Lasse

[convel2]

Hello,

this is a text wich name is translated to "The two social, or interpersonal, perspectives", the original name in Norwegian is "De to sosiale, eller mellommenneskelige, perspektivene". This is my (first) attempt to translate it from Norwegian to English.

This article/text is from this source/forum (Martinusforum) free to use in the same way as free books (or free articles), wich means that I give it away for free and anyone can make as many copies as he or she wishes. Also, I have the copyright of this text and no one else has had it before.

Have a good time reading.

Best regards, Markus Gyltnes (nickname "convel").


--- Line-space, the text follows below this line. ---



The two social, or interpersonal, perspectives.

The first of the two interpersonal perspectives that I will discuss here lies in the statement "we are all, alone" (in the/this world). In this statement lies that that we all in the end have to trust ourself, manage on our own, or maintain our own lifes ourself, as we princippaly are on our own all the time and in other words, accordingly, are "alone in the/this world".

The second of the two interpersonal perspectives lies in the statement "we are never alone" (in the world, or for example "the world is a great community"), it be, parents, siblings, other family, friends, beknowns or other forms of knowing other people. A requisite for this statement to be true is interaction with other people or equivalent, or adequate, "qualified" living creatures (whatever that would be). In the statement "we are never alone", and similar or samewise, lies among others that that we have to relate to others in a way that satisfies life's or the world's laws for everything from selfsustainment to happiness. We are "never" alone and have to follow the world's, both physical and psychic, laws to everything from suceed (manage) to be happy.

Even though these two statements apparently are contradictive, or contrary (to one another), both are correct the explanations/elaborations accordingly (also for the reader, I hope), farther, so I have chosen to call them two perspectives.



Markus Gyltnes, 2009, 2010.



--- Line-space, the text ends above this line. ---

[convel2]

Hello,

this is an article/text wich name is translated to english, the original name in Norwegian is ""Tilleggs "artikkel"/tekst til artikkelen/teksten ""Jeg"-opplevelsen, om" (artikkelen/teksten ""Jeg"-opplevelsen, om" som inneholder den andre artikkelen/teksten som heter ""Jeg"-opplevelsen, om") - bevisførsel for det jeg (forfatteren av artikkelen/teksten) mener som det mest sentrale utsagnet i artikkelen/teksten.". This is my (first) attempt to translate it from Norwegian to English.

This article/text is from this source/forum (Martinusforum) free to use in the same way as free books (or free articles), wich means that I give it away for free and anyone can make as many copies as he or she wishes. Also, I have the copyright of this article and no one else has had it before.

Have a good time reading.

Best regards, Markus Gyltnes (nickname "convel").


--- Line-space, the article/text follows below this line. ---



Additional "article"/text to the article/text "The "self"-experience, about" (the article/text "The "self"-experience, about" that wich contains the other article/text called "The "self"-experience, about") - presentation of proof on what I (the writer of the article/text) from my side mean as the most central statement in the article/text.

This is a stand by it's own "article" (the word article in quotation marks as this text not is a very long text) or text, that is independent to the article/text "The "self"-experience, about".

Markus Gyltnes, writer of the "article"/text, 2010.


Excluding proof (logical, theoretical) on that "I am nothing of that wich I experience" or the logical identical expression "I am nothing of what I experience".

I will here try to carry out a excluding or negating, logical, or theoretical, proof on the expression "I am nothing of what I experience". This is a proof that tries to exclude the possibility that the expression not not can be true, in other words exclude all other possibilities than the one that the expression is true (exclude that "I am some of what I experience" is true in preferrence to that "I am nothing of what I experience").

Proof: If "I had been some of what I experienced" I would have "experienced myself as something objective wich is identical to or the same as "something on the outside". This is impossible as something "on the outside" is absurd as (or in the "role" as) "experience of myself" as "something on the outside" is "on the outside", wich is of identical meaning to separated from "me".



--- Line-space, the article/text ends above this line. ---

[convel2]

Hello,

this is an article/text wich name is translated to english, the original name in Norwegian is "Grunnleggende forståelser underliggende forståelsen av artikkelen/teksten ""Jeg"-opplevelsen, om" (hovedteksten i artikkelen/teksten med samme navn):". This is my (first) attempt to translate it from Norwegian to English.

This article/text is from this source/forum (Martinusforum) free to use in the same way as free books (or free articles), wich means that I give it away for free and anyone can make as many copies as he or she wishes. Also, I have the copyright of this article and no one else has had it before.

Have a good time reading.

Best regards, Markus Gyltnes (nickname "convel").


--- Line-space, the article/text follows below this line. ---



Basic understandings underlying the understanding of the article/text "The "self"-experience, about" (the main text in the article/text with the same name):

Here I try to list up the understandings that are underlying the understanding of the article/text mentioned in the headline. The intention with this document is to light up the understandings underlying the understanding of the above mentioned article/text. The theory here presented comes from the understanding that I have that I have put or added toghether of Martinus cosmology and of all other theory, that I have managed to match with one another.



List with understandings:

Understandingtheory.
Language (and sentence-) formulation, ordinary understanding of language.
Understanding of what a "living individual" means.
Understanding of space and objects.
Understanding of units and connection between units.


Theory and overviews concerning the understandings underlying the understanding of the article/text "The "self"-experience, about" (see above):

Understandingtheory:

Theory about how understanding takes place.

One way to see on how understanding takes place is description of the steps in the apparent eternal circulation of to understand and to not understand (that there is something one don't understand, or that one is taken up by something else, but still has a running understanding of the world, both the inner and the outer, even if one not in such a high degree is aware of understanding something all the time as when one has a clear awareness of understanding something, by wich I mean to say that one understands something all the time).


Ordinary understanding of language - overview of content/elements:

Understanding of words.
Formulation of sentences (and reading of sentences), ability to.
To grasp words and sentences - vocabulary of terms.

Above I have tried to list up the elements in what one may call ordinary understanding of language. They seem to me to be obvious enough things for me not here go further into what they consist in.


Understanding of what a "living individual" means.

Spiritual theory about what a "living individual" is. (The word theory used in general (theory generally) and not one numbered (one theory) meaning.

In the untranslated version of this document/text there is here a section with Martinus cosmology theory. Because of trouble with translation of spiritual terms this section will be missing in this version and I don't know for how long.


Understanding of space and objects:

Belongs to (the subject) physics, and a little bit about (the subject) physics follows.

Deals with ((the subject) physics) the physical world (eventually contra the purely spiritual world). (The subject) physics deals with laws of cause and effect in the physical (contra the purely spiritual world, if it exists). Laws of cause and effect here covering the physical world, needs something to "be cause to and to effect on", this (that is what is being cause to and effected on) is what we know as physical matter (and here likewise - contra spiritual matter (term from Martinus cosmology - "spiritual matter").


Understanding of units and connections between units:

Belongs to that wich I in the article/text "The "self"-experience, about" (the one mentioned in the headline) have chosen to mention as unitary thinking, or "thinking about units" (use of term from (the subject) philosophy - "thinking about"), and wich I think can, in greater or lesser degree, belong to (the subject mathematics) discrete mathematics (as far as I can rememeber. I among others don't have easy access to a book on discrete mathematics at the moment). Anyway, it seems to me that the use of formulations that demands this kind of understanding, in the article/text "The "self"-experience, about" (the same as mentioned above), are enough to understand what this kind of understanding means.


Note:

When I in this document point at the article/text mentioned in the headline, I mean the main text in the article/text by the same name.



Markus Gyltnes, 2009, 2010.



--- Line-space, the article/text ends above this line. ---

[convel2]

Hello,

this is an article/text wich name is translated to english, the original name in Norwegian is "Oppklarende notat angående et utdrag fra teksten/dokumentet "Grunnleggende forståelser underliggende forståelsen av artikkelen/teksten ""Jeg"-opplevelsen, om" (hovedteksten i artikkelen/teksten med samme navn):"". This is my (first) attempt to translate it from Norwegian to English.

This article/text is from this source/forum (Martinusforum) free to use in the same way as free books (or free articles), wich means that I give it away for free and anyone can make as many copies as he or she wishes. Also, I have the copyright of this article and no one else has had it before.

Have a good time reading.

Best regards, Markus Gyltnes (nickname "convel").


--- Line-space, the article/text follows below this line. ---



Explanatory note concerning an excerpt from the text/document "Basic understandings underlying the understanding of the article/text "The "self"-experience, about" (the main text in the article/text with the same name):"

Here I will attempt to lighten the line (quote) "the apparent eternal circulation of to understand and to not understand" from the section with the headline "Theory about how understanding takes place." in the text with the headline mentioned in the headline of this text.

What I think of as possibly hard to understand is the phrase "the apparent eternal circulation", wich here concerns the mind - events in ones inside. The question I have in mind that it can be is how the circulation apparent becomes eternal, when one is a person who has a limitid number of years to look back on and sees for himself or herself a limited lifetime for his or hers consciousness. I hope the phrase becomes easier to understand when I here try to put things into the perspective where one sees oneself in the situation being in the now, where time has passed but one doesn't have in ones mind how much, and where one looks forward to that a more or less unknown amount of time will pass but neither here have in ones mind any ending. I'm trying to point at, among others, an experience that is as following, it is the experience of when it seems like, and I try to use these phrases, "there is no end to things", or "time has no ending". This is what I mean with the phrase "the apparent eternal circulation", and I have chosen to use this phrase to easier symbolise the idea of circulation wich differs from the idea of a line and is in a "whirl" and in its simplest thoughtform eternal, while the idea of a line in its simplest thoughform is limited in time (I'm here thinking of the idea of a line's simplest graspable form as a line of limited length, as I think it demands more from the ability to think to visualise a line of unlimited length).



Markus Gyltnes, 2010.



--- Line-space, the article/text ends above this line. ---