|
Post by steven on Jul 5, 2013 17:02:44 GMT -5
1. Is it possible to have any type of thought whatsoever that does not reference or involve one or more of the five sensory perceptions?
|
|
|
Post by steven on Jul 5, 2013 21:36:36 GMT -5
Bump....these are not BIG or difficult philosophical questions to explore, they are simple to explore with just a small amount of investigative effort.
Why is it that no one has any interest in exploring these lol
Are the ramifications something to be scared of, or to be avoided lol?
|
|
|
Post by silver on Jul 5, 2013 21:42:30 GMT -5
Bump....these are not BIG or difficult philosophical questions to explore, they are simple to explore with just a small amount of investigative effort. Why is it that no one has any interest in exploring these lol Are the ramifications something to be scared of, or to be avoided lol? If I may critique your list of questions, and me being a rank amateur at this nonduality stuff, I still think I can contribute something. Too many questions? Maybe if you had boiled them down to maybe 3 to 5 main questions?
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jul 5, 2013 21:55:25 GMT -5
Greetings.. Bump....these are not BIG or difficult philosophical questions to explore, they are simple to explore with just a small amount of investigative effort. Why is it that no one has any interest in exploring these lol Are the ramifications something to be scared of, or to be avoided lol? If I may critique your list of questions, and me being a rank amateur at this nonduality stuff, I still think I can contribute something. Too many questions? Maybe if you had boiled them down to maybe 3 to 5 main questions? Agreed.. one question per thread, and let's address one question at a time.. nine new threads just dilutes the interest of others.. Be well..
|
|
|
Post by steven on Jul 5, 2013 23:06:43 GMT -5
Okay, your wish is my command :-)
see above
|
|
|
Post by topology on Jul 5, 2013 23:40:16 GMT -5
Bump....these are not BIG or difficult philosophical questions to explore, they are simple to explore with just a small amount of investigative effort. Why is it that no one has any interest in exploring these lol Are the ramifications something to be scared of, or to be avoided lol? Part of why I don't think anyone has engaged them is probably because they are not real questions for anybody, not even you. So it feels like an invitation to pontifornication. Technically there are more than 5 senses. To reframe the question experientially, it would be asking if there are any thoughts/experiences which do not require visual, auditory, texture, olfactary or taste components. Candidates: Emotion, awareness of consciousness (there is an experience happening), the focal point of attention (constricted or broad focus). Sense of gravity, balance, etc need the context of vision and touch to give a relative orientation. You have what I would call a story-sense which detects active story, but story components are built with primitives in sight, sound and touch. Your sense of justice and fairness requires the story-sense. As for your other questions, it boils down to your ontology. Is Mind everything, or just the dimension of experience pertaining to thoughts? Thoughts to me are pale reflections of sensations happening purely in the mind's eye and not in the regions of sense-perception. Memories are thoughts. Is any of this something you are trying to figure out or is this idle chit chat?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jul 5, 2013 23:40:38 GMT -5
Bump....these are not BIG or difficult philosophical questions to explore, they are simple to explore with just a small amount of investigative effort. Why is it that no one has any interest in exploring these lol Are the ramifications something to be scared of, or to be avoided lol? There's a pattern here I see repeated often. Mind will attempt to save itself by absorbing it's enemy, and it can be quite effective. That is, it will classify all knowledge, insight, realization, 'truth' as irrelevant mind noise, and declare itself done. It can claim it knows nothing while secretly holding tightly to all manner of knowledge. (See Andrewism for details) It will declare nothing is true or false, thereby relieving itself of the burden of discrimination, and freeing itself to imagine whatever it wants to be true. (See Andrewism for details) It will dismiss the potential for awareness to expand beyond the boundaries set by mind so that there is nothing that can threaten mind. (See Andrewism for details) It will declare illusion to be truth, ignorance to be wisdom, and confusion to be clarity. (See Andrewism and Tzuism for details)
|
|
|
Post by steven on Jul 5, 2013 23:55:20 GMT -5
Bump....these are not BIG or difficult philosophical questions to explore, they are simple to explore with just a small amount of investigative effort. Why is it that no one has any interest in exploring these lol Are the ramifications something to be scared of, or to be avoided lol? There's a pattern here I see repeated often. Mind will attempt to save itself by absorbing it's enemy, and it can be quite effective. That is, it will classify all knowledge, insight, realization, 'truth' as irrelevant mind noise, and declare itself done. It can claim it knows nothing while secretly holding tightly to all manner of knowledge. (See Andrewism for details) It will declare nothing is true or false, thereby relieving itself of the burden of discrimination, and freeing itself to imagine whatever it wants to be true. (See Andrewism for details) It will dismiss the potential for awareness to expand beyond the boundaries set by mind so that there is nothing that can threaten mind. (See Andrewism for details) It will declare illusion to be truth, ignorance to be wisdom, and confusion to be clarity. (See Andrewism and Tzuism for details) Haha, you will not see me declaring anything at all and calling that done until its ALL let go of, you may see me try to simplify things into a Greasy Little Spot that can be more easily let go of though, instead of endless Neti Neti. You will also not see me saying that red is actually green either, so please select a different story that does not make use of a story colored by your past experiences, or better yet, make no story at all LoL Declaring things as irrelevant mind noise, or declaring it as anything at all, and thinking that anything is "done", has nothing to do with what is said or implied here, that is you categorizing and dismissing something that you may not want to explore at this time. To be clear, any knowledge or categorizing, or declaring etc, probably means that you are not "done"....though lumping everything together as meaningless, or irrelevant, or utterly relative etc, may make it easier to throw the whole lump of Knowing away in one shot, instead of trying to "realize" your way out of it one bit at a time ;-)
|
|
|
Post by silver on Jul 6, 2013 0:02:41 GMT -5
There's a pattern here I see repeated often. Mind will attempt to save itself by absorbing it's enemy, and it can be quite effective. That is, it will classify all knowledge, insight, realization, 'truth' as irrelevant mind noise, and declare itself done. It can claim it knows nothing while secretly holding tightly to all manner of knowledge. (See Andrewism for details) It will declare nothing is true or false, thereby relieving itself of the burden of discrimination, and freeing itself to imagine whatever it wants to be true. (See Andrewism for details) It will dismiss the potential for awareness to expand beyond the boundaries set by mind so that there is nothing that can threaten mind. (See Andrewism for details) It will declare illusion to be truth, ignorance to be wisdom, and confusion to be clarity. (See Andrewism and Tzuism for details) Haha, you will not see me declaring anything at all and calling that done until its ALL let go of, you may see me try to simplify things into a Greasy Little Spot that can be more easily let go of though, instead of endless Neti Neti. You will also not see me saying that red is actually green either, so please select a different story that does not make use of a story colored by your past experiences, or better yet, make no story at all LoLDeclaring things as irrelevant mind noise, or declaring it as anything at all, and thinking that anything is "done", has nothing to do with what is said or implied here, that is you categorizing and dismissing something that you may not want to explore at this time. To be clear, any knowledge or categorizing, or declaring etc, probably means that you are not "done"....though lumping everything together as meaningless, or irrelevant, or utterly relative etc, may make it easier to through the whole pump of Knowing away in one shot ;-) You tell 'em, Steve.
|
|
|
Post by steven on Jul 6, 2013 0:21:28 GMT -5
Bump....these are not BIG or difficult philosophical questions to explore, they are simple to explore with just a small amount of investigative effort. Why is it that no one has any interest in exploring these lol Are the ramifications something to be scared of, or to be avoided lol? Part of why I don't think anyone has engaged them is probably because they are not real questions for anybody, not even you. So it feels like an invitation to pontifornication. Technically there are more than 5 senses. To reframe the question experientially, it would be asking if there are any thoughts/experiences which do not require visual, auditory, texture, olfactary or taste components. Candidates: Emotion, awareness of consciousness (there is an experience happening), the focal point of attention (constricted or broad focus). Sense of gravity, balance, etc need the context of vision and touch to give a relative orientation. You have what I would call a story-sense which detects active story, but story components are built with primitives in sight, sound and touch. Your sense of justice and fairness requires the story-sense. As for your other questions, it boils down to your ontology. Is Mind everything, or just the dimension of experience pertaining to thoughts? Thoughts to me are pale reflections of sensations happening purely in the mind's eye and not in the regions of sense-perception. Memories are thoughts. Is any of this something you are trying to figure out or is this idle chit chat? Can you list one emotion that is not an aggregate of a thought and a physical sensation, even if that physical sensation is very subtle? In the absence of even a subtle physical sensation of touch that feels weight distribution, can one sense gravity or balance? When one is experiencing a sense of justice, even when one is not conjuring mental images (sight) or ideas (words and therefore referenced by hearing even if it is an imagined sound) that is associated with the actions or causation of the "sense" of justice, the actual sensation of justice is an almagimation of thoughts that reference sight or hearing, and emotions that register as subtle or heavy physical sensations....pay close attention to your emotions sometime, and see if they are not in fact a subtle imagined or "actual" physical sensation that is often initiated by a thought that references one or more of the five physical senses. The "story sense" cannot happen without a story, and the story cannot happen without a reference or relativity to the five physical senses. And the five physical senses cannot occur outside of Mind can they? The one thing that you listed that does not seem to only occur relative to the five senses, is Awareness of Consciousness, but in my experience, Steady Awareness of Consciousness opens a space for the cessation of Mind, which is why I have recommended focusing attention on Awareness of Awareness. In any case, the question is: Are thereANY thoughts that can occur that are not relative in some way to the five physical senses? Not, are there other Senses that thought is ALSO relative to lol
|
|
|
Post by steven on Jul 6, 2013 0:30:43 GMT -5
It's odd, but no one has actually answered the question lol
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jul 6, 2013 2:23:22 GMT -5
Bump....these are not BIG or difficult philosophical questions to explore, they are simple to explore with just a small amount of investigative effort. Why is it that no one has any interest in exploring these lol Are the ramifications something to be scared of, or to be avoided lol? There's a pattern here I see repeated often. Mind will attempt to save itself by absorbing it's enemy, and it can be quite effective. That is, it will classify all knowledge, insight, realization, 'truth' as irrelevant mind noise, and declare itself done. It can claim it knows nothing while secretly holding tightly to all manner of knowledge. (See Andrewism for details) It will declare nothing is true or false, thereby relieving itself of the burden of discrimination, and freeing itself to imagine whatever it wants to be true. (See Andrewism for details) It will dismiss the potential for awareness to expand beyond the boundaries set by mind so that there is nothing that can threaten mind. (See Andrewism for details) It will declare illusion to be truth, ignorance to be wisdom, and confusion to be clarity. (See Andrewism and Tzuism for details) a)I haven't said 'I know nothing', I have said that its possible that I do know a bunch of stuff. b) I haven't said 'nothing is true or false', I have said 'nothing is necessarily true or false'. c) I have barely touched on the subject of 'awareness' other than to say that it is speculation that it is prior. d) I have not said that illusion is truth, ignorance is wisdom, confusion is clarity, though I have spoken of losing the need to put in barriers. Nice set of giraffes!
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jul 6, 2013 3:56:27 GMT -5
1. Is it possible to have any type of thought whatsoever that does not reference or involve one or more of the five sensory perceptions? This is a form of the "when does it stop being a car?" koan.nope
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jul 6, 2013 5:33:34 GMT -5
Greetings..
1. Is it possible to have any type of thought whatsoever that does not reference or involve one or more of the five sensory perceptions?
Yes.. Insights, unsolicited awareness of a previously unknown condition, relationship, or understanding..
Be well..
|
|
|
Post by topology on Jul 6, 2013 7:33:39 GMT -5
It's odd, but no one has actually answered the question lol Please define what a thought is to you.
|
|