|
Post by silver on Apr 10, 2015 1:29:54 GMT -5
I'm not the owner of my thoughts, but i have exclusive rights to them.. some are spontaneous and unsolicited, some are carefully crafted and intentionally constructed..Those are too spontaneous. Now, you are jokester. Very good. Too spontaneous!
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Apr 10, 2015 2:25:54 GMT -5
If you're a really clever watcher, you can watch yourself thinking the thought 'I'm watching for the next thought'. Hehe. When you forget to think that thought is when you start thinking other thoughts, and then catch yourself coming through the door. It's all a one man show. The best you can do is back up the observation point until a real gap occurs, but when it does you won't be there to experience it. It's auspicious nonetheless. Hmm,.. maybe I'm missing something. I can see the "I'm watching for the next thought" thought, but what I'm referring to (well, what I think I'm referring to..) is not that. When it happens, its like the thought radio has been switched off. Everything continues on, but its mentally silent. Yes, in my experience, the watcher is a mental construct and the gaps aren't thought, they're the absence of thought. This is how I'd describe the process in more detail. The difference between split-mind concentrated attention on the thought "what is the next thought?" and attention absent thought is openness. In silent witnessing, interests in the form of thoughts at various levels of formation will come and go, and each of these is an opportunity to remain detached, with no attention -- no energy -- flowing into the interest. All interests have at their root the first thought, the first cut, some sort of limit between one thing and another, and hidden in there somewhere is the "I". What happens is that these excitations just dissolve and dissipate when they are not grasped, and just allowed to rise and fall naturally. Over time what can happen is that as attention relaxes and awareness broadens, the gaps get longer and deeper and a state that is sort of self-sustaining takes hold. It's interesting to note the physical changes that are going on as this happens. So at the inception of a sit like this, we encounter a genuine interest in losing interest for at least awhile. When the interest isn't genuine then we arrive at the mind-split, and noticing the difference between these two states is both interesting and facilitates shifting from the split to the witness.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Apr 10, 2015 2:41:42 GMT -5
I'm not the owner of my thoughts, but i have exclusive rights to them.. some are spontaneous and unsolicited, some are carefully crafted and intentionally constructed..Those are too spontaneous. It's an interesting point. Attention constricts on a task like solving an equation, giving someone directions, counting out cash to pay for something, or calling home to let everyone know you got somewhere safe. In the constriction, one thought follows the other in a conditioned sequence until some goal is reached, but the context of the cause of the inception and completion of the constriction is arbitrary. Did the counting of the cash become a foregone conclusion when you picked the item off the shelf? when you walked into the store? when you had the idea to go there? Well, what led up to that? Assigning intent to the sequence of thought is, as you suggest with the idea of spontaneity, just the idea of ownership in a different form. The TMT here starts with coming up for an excuse for the "I" thought.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Apr 10, 2015 2:45:50 GMT -5
In English, please. Remember the good old days when you used to tell me to read what's written? Well...now it's your turn. BTW, which words did you think weren't in English? Blick fleebleknot ork ivitsnorp if the pollinafs don't judopeamorph the ibicsills.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 10, 2015 2:46:09 GMT -5
Those are too spontaneous. Now, you are jokester. Very good. Too spontaneous! I mean to say the thoughts which appear like 'self directed' spontaneous too, they are not self direct infact.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 10, 2015 2:50:29 GMT -5
Those are too spontaneous. It's an interesting point. Attention constricts on a task like solving an equation, giving someone directions, counting out cash to pay for something, or calling home to let everyone know you got somewhere safe. In the constriction, one thought follows the other in a conditioned sequence until some goal is reached, but the context of the cause of the inception and completion of the constriction is arbitrary. Did the counting of the cash become a foregone conclusion when you picked the item off the shelf? when you walked into the store? when you had the idea to go there? Well, what led up to that? Assigning intent to the sequence of thought is, as you suggest with the idea of spontaneity, just the idea of ownership in a different form. The TMT here starts with coming up for an excuse for the "I" thought. Actually I mean to say the thoughts which appears to be 'self directed' are spontaneous too and it's not in fact self directed as we usually assume.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 10, 2015 2:54:47 GMT -5
Hmm,.. maybe I'm missing something. I can see the "I'm watching for the next thought" thought, but what I'm referring to (well, what I think I'm referring to..) is not that. When it happens, its like the thought radio has been switched off. Everything continues on, but its mentally silent. Yes , in my experience, the watcher is a mental construct and the gaps aren't thought, they're the absence of thought. This is how I'd describe the process in more detail. The difference between split-mind concentrated attention on the thought "what is the next thought?" and attention absent thought is openness. In silent witnessing, interests in the form of thoughts at various levels of formation will come and go, and each of these is an opportunity to remain detached, with no attention -- no energy -- flowing into the interest. All interests have at their root the first thought, the first cut, some sort of limit between one thing and another, and hidden in there somewhere is the "I". What happens is that these excitations just dissolve and dissipate when they are not grasped, and just allowed to rise and fall naturally. Over time what can happen is that as attention relaxes and awareness broadens, the gaps get longer and deeper and a state that is sort of self-sustaining takes hold. It's interesting to note the physical changes that are going on as this happens. So at the inception of a sit like this, we encounter a genuine interest in losing interest for at least awhile. When the interest isn't genuine then we arrive at the mind-split, and noticing the difference between these two states is both interesting and facilitates shifting from the split to the witness. If you only consider the mental thoughts then you could say gap appears when you look into outer world focus, but if you just consider only appearance, then there is no gap, consciousness never left with no appearance so no gaps.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Apr 10, 2015 2:54:54 GMT -5
It's an interesting point. Attention constricts on a task like solving an equation, giving someone directions, counting out cash to pay for something, or calling home to let everyone know you got somewhere safe. In the constriction, one thought follows the other in a conditioned sequence until some goal is reached, but the context of the cause of the inception and completion of the constriction is arbitrary. Did the counting of the cash become a foregone conclusion when you picked the item off the shelf? when you walked into the store? when you had the idea to go there? Well, what led up to that? Assigning intent to the sequence of thought is, as you suggest with the idea of spontaneity, just the idea of ownership in a different form. The TMT here starts with coming up for an excuse for the "I" thought. Actually I mean to say the thoughts which appears to be 'self directed' are spontaneous too and it's not in fact self directed as we usually assume. Yes, self-direction is simply a contextual overlay onto the content of thoughts and actions and feelings. It can be a useful context and it can also refer to an inherent self-deception.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 10, 2015 2:56:07 GMT -5
Actually I mean to say the thoughts which appears to be 'self directed' are spontaneous too and it's not in fact self directed as we usually assume. Yes, self-direction is simply a contextual overlay onto the content of thoughts and actions and feelings. It can be a useful context and it can also refer to an inherent self-deception. Yes correct, this self-deception happens because it feels as if we are the one doing that, but in actuality it's not.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Apr 10, 2015 3:01:53 GMT -5
Yes , in my experience, the watcher is a mental construct and the gaps aren't thought, they're the absence of thought. This is how I'd describe the process in more detail. The difference between split-mind concentrated attention on the thought "what is the next thought?" and attention absent thought is openness. In silent witnessing, interests in the form of thoughts at various levels of formation will come and go, and each of these is an opportunity to remain detached, with no attention -- no energy -- flowing into the interest. All interests have at their root the first thought, the first cut, some sort of limit between one thing and another, and hidden in there somewhere is the "I". What happens is that these excitations just dissolve and dissipate when they are not grasped, and just allowed to rise and fall naturally. Over time what can happen is that as attention relaxes and awareness broadens, the gaps get longer and deeper and a state that is sort of self-sustaining takes hold. It's interesting to note the physical changes that are going on as this happens. So at the inception of a sit like this, we encounter a genuine interest in losing interest for at least awhile. When the interest isn't genuine then we arrive at the mind-split, and noticing the difference between these two states is both interesting and facilitates shifting from the split to the witness. If you only consider the mental thoughts then you could say gap appears when you look into outer world focus, but if you just consider only appearance, then there is no gap, consciousness never left with no appearance so no gaps. Have you ever meditated so deeply that the world just completely fell away and time seemed to stop?
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Apr 10, 2015 3:14:50 GMT -5
Yes, self-direction is simply a contextual overlay onto the content of thoughts and actions and feelings. It can be a useful context and it can also refer to an inherent self-deception. Yes correct, this self-deception happens because it feels as if we are the one doing that, but in actuality it's not. yes. Time now for some preemption of my own. peeps don't like "no doer", and now's the time when some variant of this guy is gonna' show up on the thread: "uuuhhhhhh yeah right dooooood ... so do ya' still answer to yer name?? heh heh ... what if I punch ya' in the face, will ya' do something then dooood? heh heh ..."
|
|
|
Post by zin on Apr 10, 2015 3:17:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jay17 on Apr 10, 2015 3:20:22 GMT -5
What part of the bolded text do you not understand? Obviously, I understood it completely or I wouldn't have parodied it. What was it you didn't understand about that? Looks to me that you did not understand what i was referring to. I'll do it again... **Steps up to the preacher's pulpit**There is evidence, but you must learn how to see. **Walks briskly, but self righteously, toward the door** I do not have any inclining to be preached to. I've already done the 'dogmatic religion' part of my journey, i see no need to take another one. How many threads do you and others like you need to produce to express your profound devotion to just of one of thousands of theories about existence, till you are satisfied, till you are at peace and there is no more disturbance within yourself that you no longer feel the urge to speak.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Apr 10, 2015 3:20:24 GMT -5
" ? His cigarette is burning but it never seems to ash he is in the music business he is calling you doooooood! ?"
|
|
|
Post by zin on Apr 10, 2015 3:22:26 GMT -5
" ? His cigarette is burning but it never seems to ash he is in the music business he is calling you doooooood! ?" Cake became another addiction! But I don't wish to dilute this (good) thread
|
|