|
Post by andrew on Jun 15, 2019 11:52:54 GMT -5
Where would 'unconscious (or subconscious) mind' fit into your understanding here? From my POV I see subconscious mental activity as that which underlies the intellect. When the intellect is quiescent (no conscious thoughts occurring), the body continues to function intelligently, and the world in known and interacted with non-conceptually in the same way that little children see and interact with it. IOW, I see the intellect similarly to Chilton Pierce--as a secondary program that creates an imaginary meta-reality that most people mistake for reality. When the intellect is not engaged, the primary program is the only thing functioning, and this is what Zen calls living in a state of "no mind." yeah, that makes sense to me , though it's one reason for the distinction between intellect and mind. Intellect refers specifically to the 'head stuff', whereas the subconscious aspect can be running quietly in the background making sure the body continues to function intelligently.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Jun 15, 2019 12:18:53 GMT -5
From my POV I see subconscious mental activity as that which underlies the intellect. When the intellect is quiescent (no conscious thoughts occurring), the body continues to function intelligently, and the world in known and interacted with non-conceptually in the same way that little children see and interact with it. IOW, I see the intellect similarly to Chilton Pierce--as a secondary program that creates an imaginary meta-reality that most people mistake for reality. When the intellect is not engaged, the primary program is the only thing functioning, and this is what Zen calls living in a state of "no mind." yeah, that makes sense to me , though it's one reason for the distinction between intellect and mind. Intellect refers specifically to the 'head stuff', whereas the subconscious aspect can be running quietly in the background making sure the body continues to function intelligently. Agreed.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 16, 2019 3:38:18 GMT -5
This is how I was conditioned to relate to the notion of mind -- and it goes deeper than just a mental exercise. Encountering Tolle, in this sense, was counter to that conditioning, so I certainly see the value in the way ZD conceives of it. Yes, for me, Tolle explicated the way I had always understood the term--as the brain function that allows humans to think about the world, make distinctions, replicate the distinctions with images, symbolize the distinctions with words and ideas, and talk about the distinctions both to other people and to one's self (mind talk). Tolle had suffered from incessant mind talk prior to the event that freed him from his thoughts, so his teaching focused upon helping other people recognize the effects of mind talk and learning to shift attention away from mind talk to the world beyond distinction. Probably because I, too, had lost all peace of mind as a result of incessant mind talk, and only realized what had happened after I began meditating, I identified with Tolle's approach to that subject. Byron Katie and most other contemporary ND sages also focus on mind talk, abstract thoughts about the world, and ways of becoming free of thoughts that typically restrict one's psychological freedom. The "intellect" is how scientists usually distinguish the pre-frontal cortex that allows abstract thought, and many of us think of mind as synonymous with the intellect. Intelligence is obviously a distributed phenomena, but until humans evolved a pre-frontal cortex I doubt any sense of selfhood existed as an abstraction. There are many other ways to define "mind," all of which are abstract, but I prefer the flavor of "mind as intellect" because it's the reflecting function of the intellect that gives rise to the sense of selfhood and the sense of separateness in general. It's an irony that the interconnected nature of the objects of the pre-frontal cortex, the rest of the brain, the feet, the ground, and the turtles-all-the-way down .. are hidden there for the intellect, right in plain sight.
|
|
|
Post by lopezcabellero on Jun 19, 2019 12:43:00 GMT -5
I spose the crux of the issue is thought identification. Tolle actually defined ego as the state of mind identification, to be identified with one's mind. Consciousness interprets life as a separate person through the use of the human mind, and falls into the delusion that it is the mind during the collective interface.
A child's mind/body/spirit is less susceptible to, or conditioned by, the collective program which ingrains the tendencies which make consciousness sick as the person. You may ask a 3 year old if what he is, is a person or an invisible omnipotent observer, and he may very well look at you like you have 2 heads or no head at all, but this isn't an indication of identification. Being conditioned to operate as a person is not the same as being conditioned to operate in a mode unconscious of emotions of the person operating, the latter of which is the fuel for the id complex and is it very self what Tolle referred to as the pain body. The term pain body itself, oversimplifies the nightmare of human repression, but nevertheless cuts to the very core of what drives thought identification, emotional pain and its avoidance.
I call oversimplification because the avoidance of pain can look like pleasure, even bliss, even self realization, as there is a myriad of ways in which our minds misconstrue the minds transcendence. Furthermore, who is to say behavioral repression is negative or perpetuating windfall unconsciousness. Should the urge to kill not be repressed? Should we not restrict the rapist's behavior? If in our restriction we are not promoting consciousness or healing, is the restriction itself not a form of collective dysfunction?
The tendrils of unconsciousness run deep through modern day society. Criminal justice is either about punishment, deterrence, correction (healing), or retribution (revenge). If there is no repentance, who can be healed? If we want revenge, how far removed is forgiveness? If this is 'our' society, to what degree are we all affected subconsciously by what's going on around us?
Mind control might be an uncomfortable term for some folks, maybe only one step removed from programmed retardation. But all around us are the effects and people warring with the effects while only a select few know anything about cause. The retardation of one's spiritual growth being inflicted upon us from the second we pick up a resonance of the greater matrix. How dangerous would it be to quote unquote destroy one's mind in the midst of such a stunted state?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2019 17:07:57 GMT -5
I spose the crux of the issue is thought identification. Tolle actually defined ego as the state of mind identification, to be identified with one's mind. Consciousness interprets life as a separate person through the use of the human mind, and falls into the delusion that it is the mind during the collective interface. A child's mind/body/spirit is less susceptible to, or conditioned by, the collective program which ingrains the tendencies which make consciousness sick as the person. You may ask a 3 year old if what he is, is a person or an invisible omnipotent observer, and he may very well look at you like you have 2 heads or no head at all, but this isn't an indication of identification. Being conditioned to operate as a person is not the same as being conditioned to operate in a mode unconscious of emotions of the person operating, the latter of which is the fuel for the id complex and is it very self what Tolle referred to as the pain body. The term pain body itself, oversimplifies the nightmare of human repression, but nevertheless cuts to the very core of what drives thought identification, emotional pain and its avoidance. I call oversimplification because the avoidance of pain can look like pleasure, even bliss, even self realization, as there is a myriad of ways in which our minds misconstrue the minds transcendence. Furthermore, who is to say behavioral repression is negative or perpetuating windfall unconsciousness. Should the urge to kill not be repressed? Should we not restrict the rapist's behavior? If in our restriction we are not promoting consciousness or healing, is the restriction itself not a form of collective dysfunction? The tendrils of unconsciousness run deep through modern day society. Criminal justice is either about punishment, deterrence, correction (healing), or retribution (revenge). If there is no repentance, who can be healed? If we want revenge, how far removed is forgiveness? If this is 'our' society, to what degree are we all affected subconsciously by what's going on around us? Mind control might be an uncomfortable term for some folks, maybe only one step removed from programmed retardation. But all around us are the effects and people warring with the effects while only a select few know anything about cause. The retardation of one's spiritual growth being inflicted upon us from the second we pick up a resonance of the greater matrix. How dangerous would it be to quote unquote destroy one's mind in the midst of such a stunted state?It must be understood that it is the mind that is believing that there is a stunted state.
|
|
|
Post by lopezcabellero on Jun 20, 2019 22:30:20 GMT -5
I spose the crux of the issue is thought identification. Tolle actually defined ego as the state of mind identification, to be identified with one's mind. Consciousness interprets life as a separate person through the use of the human mind, and falls into the delusion that it is the mind during the collective interface. A child's mind/body/spirit is less susceptible to, or conditioned by, the collective program which ingrains the tendencies which make consciousness sick as the person. You may ask a 3 year old if what he is, is a person or an invisible omnipotent observer, and he may very well look at you like you have 2 heads or no head at all, but this isn't an indication of identification. Being conditioned to operate as a person is not the same as being conditioned to operate in a mode unconscious of emotions of the person operating, the latter of which is the fuel for the id complex and is it very self what Tolle referred to as the pain body. The term pain body itself, oversimplifies the nightmare of human repression, but nevertheless cuts to the very core of what drives thought identification, emotional pain and its avoidance. I call oversimplification because the avoidance of pain can look like pleasure, even bliss, even self realization, as there is a myriad of ways in which our minds misconstrue the minds transcendence. Furthermore, who is to say behavioral repression is negative or perpetuating windfall unconsciousness. Should the urge to kill not be repressed? Should we not restrict the rapist's behavior? If in our restriction we are not promoting consciousness or healing, is the restriction itself not a form of collective dysfunction? The tendrils of unconsciousness run deep through modern day society. Criminal justice is either about punishment, deterrence, correction (healing), or retribution (revenge). If there is no repentance, who can be healed? If we want revenge, how far removed is forgiveness? If this is 'our' society, to what degree are we all affected subconsciously by what's going on around us? Mind control might be an uncomfortable term for some folks, maybe only one step removed from programmed retardation. But all around us are the effects and people warring with the effects while only a select few know anything about cause. The retardation of one's spiritual growth being inflicted upon us from the second we pick up a resonance of the greater matrix. How dangerous would it be to quote unquote destroy one's mind in the midst of such a stunted state?It must be understood that it is the mind that is believing that there is a stunted state. I figured that would go without saying. What really must be understood is that conscious minds are less stunted than unconscious ones.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Jun 21, 2019 15:39:54 GMT -5
Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation. I came across this quote when I came across Ian, a few experiences and I ended up at my local library. And my library is the size of a shoe box But on this day they were getting rid of books no one was interested in. One had the quote by Oscar Wilde Yet I was more drawn to and I managed to pick up a beautiful book on William Blake for just 50 pence. I can see where Reefs is pointing at with the A-H teachings. Where most sages don't point the importance of living and being awake too I came across a video on Ramana how he was pointing at That yet in the Satsang environment many incidents occurred around people stealing either from fellow Satsangis or the ashram being broken into at some point It may not be shown in the marketplace against the teachings as Ramana is a great sage no doubt But when you set up shop these experiences may occur So the rating list does have its place on this site but there is much outside of the ratings on just giving stars to a teaching The living of This, the experiential side I will post the video of the typical politics in ashrams or monasteries that can occur. Probably Sunday as I've just come in from work But here's a video on managing money and awakening a talk with Eckhart Tolle and Geneen Roth I overlooked this post until today, and the video it contains is quite interesting, as is Ms. Roth's book, "Lost and Found." As noted in the video, Ms. Roth and her husband had all of their money invested with Bernie Madoff, and they thought it was quite safe, so it was quite a shock when Ms. Roth got a phone call and discovered that all of their money had disappeared in Madoff's huge Ponzi scheme! This event led to some awakening experiences about money and much much more. Also, for those who are interested, David Rubin interviewed Eckhart a few days ago, and that interview is available on youtube in two sections.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Jun 21, 2019 15:57:19 GMT -5
A note of explanation: For some reason the above post by Bluey showed up on this thread when I was searching for a quote by Eckhart. I responded to the post, but the response did not appear after I posted it. The website had inserted the post into the body of the Eckhart Tolle thread rather than as the most recent posting on that thread. I therefore moved it here in order for it to be seen. I was going to start a new thread about the Rubin interview, but finally decided that it was easier to simply move the post than to start a new thread.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2019 4:27:25 GMT -5
It must be understood that it is the mind that is believing that there is a stunted state. I figured that would go without saying. What really must be understood is that conscious minds are less stunted than unconscious ones. It sounds like you're still re-decorating your living room. Grey and pink can work well together with some subtle splashes of green.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2019 6:41:23 GMT -5
I spose the crux of the issue is thought identification. Tolle actually defined ego as the state of mind identification, to be identified with one's mind. Consciousness interprets life as a separate person through the use of the human mind, and falls into the delusion that it is the mind during the collective interface. A child's mind/body/spirit is less susceptible to, or conditioned by, the collective program which ingrains the tendencies which make consciousness sick as the person. You may ask a 3 year old if what he is, is a person or an invisible omnipotent observer, and he may very well look at you like you have 2 heads or no head at all, but this isn't an indication of identification. Being conditioned to operate as a person is not the same as being conditioned to operate in a mode unconscious of emotions of the person operating, the latter of which is the fuel for the id complex and is it very self what Tolle referred to as the pain body. The term pain body itself, oversimplifies the nightmare of human repression, but nevertheless cuts to the very core of what drives thought identification, emotional pain and its avoidance. I call oversimplification because the avoidance of pain can look like pleasure, even bliss, even self realization, as there is a myriad of ways in which our minds misconstrue the minds transcendence. Furthermore, who is to say behavioral repression is negative or perpetuating windfall unconsciousness. Should the urge to kill not be repressed? Should we not restrict the rapist's behavior? If in our restriction we are not promoting consciousness or healing, is the restriction itself not a form of collective dysfunction? The tendrils of unconsciousness run deep through modern day society. Criminal justice is either about punishment, deterrence, correction (healing), or retribution (revenge). If there is no repentance, who can be healed? If we want revenge, how far removed is forgiveness? If this is 'our' society, to what degree are we all affected subconsciously by what's going on around us? Mind control might be an uncomfortable term for some folks, maybe only one step removed from programmed retardation. But all around us are the effects and people warring with the effects while only a select few know anything about cause. The retardation of one's spiritual growth being inflicted upon us from the second we pick up a resonance of the greater matrix. How dangerous would it be to quote unquote destroy one's mind in the midst of such a stunted state? You might have something there. This is why Ramana harps about removal of vasanas (mental tendencies), what you might call conditioning as a precursor to enlightenment. Though there's room for debate as to whether Self abidance or Self knowledge accomplishes this--reading James' book about Ramana he doesn't like the term Self-ennquiry.
|
|
|
Post by lopezcabellero on Jun 22, 2019 14:17:42 GMT -5
I figured that would go without saying. What really must be understood is that conscious minds are less stunted than unconscious ones. It sounds like you're still re-decorating your living room. Grey and pink can work well together with some subtle splashes of green. You believe conscious and unconscious minds are equal and the same? Or only that becoming conscious isn't possible? Do you actually want to engage me in a dialogue, or just throw one liners you heard from someone else while keeping your conditioning as far away from consciousness as possible? **awkward silence**
|
|
|
Post by lopezcabellero on Jun 22, 2019 14:33:43 GMT -5
I spose the crux of the issue is thought identification. Tolle actually defined ego as the state of mind identification, to be identified with one's mind. Consciousness interprets life as a separate person through the use of the human mind, and falls into the delusion that it is the mind during the collective interface. A child's mind/body/spirit is less susceptible to, or conditioned by, the collective program which ingrains the tendencies which make consciousness sick as the person. You may ask a 3 year old if what he is, is a person or an invisible omnipotent observer, and he may very well look at you like you have 2 heads or no head at all, but this isn't an indication of identification. Being conditioned to operate as a person is not the same as being conditioned to operate in a mode unconscious of emotions of the person operating, the latter of which is the fuel for the id complex and is it very self what Tolle referred to as the pain body. The term pain body itself, oversimplifies the nightmare of human repression, but nevertheless cuts to the very core of what drives thought identification, emotional pain and its avoidance. I call oversimplification because the avoidance of pain can look like pleasure, even bliss, even self realization, as there is a myriad of ways in which our minds misconstrue the minds transcendence. Furthermore, who is to say behavioral repression is negative or perpetuating windfall unconsciousness. Should the urge to kill not be repressed? Should we not restrict the rapist's behavior? If in our restriction we are not promoting consciousness or healing, is the restriction itself not a form of collective dysfunction? The tendrils of unconsciousness run deep through modern day society. Criminal justice is either about punishment, deterrence, correction (healing), or retribution (revenge). If there is no repentance, who can be healed? If we want revenge, how far removed is forgiveness? If this is 'our' society, to what degree are we all affected subconsciously by what's going on around us? Mind control might be an uncomfortable term for some folks, maybe only one step removed from programmed retardation. But all around us are the effects and people warring with the effects while only a select few know anything about cause. The retardation of one's spiritual growth being inflicted upon us from the second we pick up a resonance of the greater matrix. How dangerous would it be to quote unquote destroy one's mind in the midst of such a stunted state? You might have something there. This is why Ramana harps about removal of vasanas (mental tendencies), what you might call conditioning as a precursor to enlightenment. Though there's room for debate as to whether Self abidance or Self knowledge accomplishes this--reading James' book about Ramana he doesn't like the term Self-ennquiry. I think you were pretty spot on with the destroying mind fallacy. If we look at the person as a conditioned entity, we could say conditioning is observed by unconditioned consciousness. This conceptual split gives rise to the illusion that one is separate from the other, or even better, embodies the illusion that what you are prior to enlightenment is separate from what you could be after. Obviously, you don't need to remove the person in order for there to be enlightenment. Ramana still woke up every day and engaged in dialogue with other people, and this was obviously a big tendency of his. He may have even had a habit of picking his nose, and I don't think stopping his nose picking is a precursor to anything. I believe we spoke previously about conscious and unconscious tendencies, the latter of which I would call vasanas which could be uprooted to bring one closer to God or a life in harmony with oneness, the embodiment of realization. Uprooting vasanas isn't about Self knowledge, it's about the absence of avoidance of self knowledge, the absence of your mind functioning unconsciously to avoid already existing emotions. That absence is brought about through making the mind conscious. So, we have the already debunked split between the unconditioned consciousness and the conditioned consciousness, and yet, another apparent and experiential split between a person conditioned to be unconscious of itself, who thus possesses the potential to achieve greater consciousness through loss of unconsciousness. Could an argument be made that you get there through Self abidance? I spose, but then we're equating the Self with the observer and calling the conditioned person not Self. All is the Self. It's true you aren't a person. But from another angle it's also true you aren't not a person either. The person is an expression of Self and there is no True Self to abide in. There is nowhere to hide, and no need to either. All is amicably, and sometimes un-amicably, One.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Jun 22, 2019 17:29:17 GMT -5
Lopez: "Could we get there through Self abidance?" The way I see it is that we are always abiding as Self whether enlightened or unenlightened. I prefer to think of the path as leading to non-abidance in intellect, and I suppose one reason I like Tolle as a teacher is that he usually points to that state and explains various ways to get there. These days I laughingly refer to my path as one of mindLESSness rather than mindFULness. LOL.
After my first insights into how I had become entranced, I saw very little value in the habit of watching thoughts. The problem I faced, and the problem most people face, is that I was already habituated to incessant thought. I realized that little children are not burdened by incessant thoughts, so I began doing what little children do--looking, listening, smelling, tasting, and touching. I kept shifting attention away from thoughts to what could be seen, heard, felt, etc. and the intellect became increasingly silent. Becoming silent seemed to trigger more and more realizations, and eventually even the illusion of selfhood collapsed. That was twenty years ago, and "the little guy in the head" never came back. After it became obvious that there's only one unified process that we call "reality," and that all of us are one-with THAT, life became simple and effortless.
These days I chuckle when I hear people say that it's impossible to stop thinking because I/THIS can stop thinking anytime I/IT wants to. It no longer matters to me/IT whether there's thinking or mental silence, because there's no longer a belief in a separate self that does anything. Nevertheless, because I/THIS spent so many years shifting attention away from thoughts, the body/mind can stop thinking at any time and just watch what's happening in total silence. This ability isn't special in any way; it's simply a consequence of spending a great deal of time living life like little children--without incessant thoughts constantly interpreting what's going on or thinking ABOUT what's going on.
I suppose "mindLESSness," despite being a humorous concept in comparison to "mindFULness," might more accurately be called "mental silence," but the common term for this in the Zen tradition is "non-abidance in mind." It simply means that one is not entranced by mental verbiage and locked into the conventional beliefs that usually arise as a result of continual mental verbiage.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2019 19:20:02 GMT -5
It sounds like you're still re-decorating your living room. Grey and pink can work well together with some subtle splashes of green. You believe conscious and unconscious minds are equal and the same? Or only that becoming conscious isn't possible? Do you actually want to engage me in a dialogue, or just throw one liners you heard from someone else while keeping your conditioning as far away from consciousness as possible? **awkward silence** I don't believe that there are individual minds, though I understand that they are completely necessary. People can be more present in their being yes. Though there are those that don't need to be any more present than they already are. I have no preference either way really.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2019 7:52:55 GMT -5
You might have something there. This is why Ramana harps about removal of vasanas (mental tendencies), what you might call conditioning as a precursor to enlightenment. Though there's room for debate as to whether Self abidance or Self knowledge accomplishes this--reading James' book about Ramana he doesn't like the term Self-ennquiry. I think you were pretty spot on with the destroying mind fallacy. If we look at the person as a conditioned entity, we could say conditioning is observed by unconditioned consciousness. This conceptual split gives rise to the illusion that one is separate from the other, or even better, embodies the illusion that what you are prior to enlightenment is separate from what you could be after. Obviously, you don't need to remove the person in order for there to be enlightenment. Ramana still woke up every day and engaged in dialogue with other people, and this was obviously a big tendency of his. He may have even had a habit of picking his nose, and I don't think stopping his nose picking is a precursor to anything. I believe we spoke previously about conscious and unconscious tendencies, the latter of which I would call vasanas which could be uprooted to bring one closer to God or a life in harmony with oneness, the embodiment of realization. Uprooting vasanas isn't about Self knowledge, it's about the absence of avoidance of self knowledge, the absence of your mind functioning unconsciously to avoid already existing emotions. That absence is brought about through making the mind conscious. So, we have the already debunked split between the unconditioned consciousness and the conditioned consciousness, and yet, another apparent and experiential split between a person conditioned to be unconscious of itself, who thus possesses the potential to achieve greater consciousness through loss of unconsciousness. Could an argument be made that you get there through Self abidance? I spose, but then we're equating the Self with the observer and calling the conditioned person not Self. All is the Self. It's true you aren't a person. But from another angle it's also true you aren't not a person either. The person is an expression of Self and there is no True Self to abide in. There is nowhere to hide, and no need to either. All is amicably, and sometimes un-amicably, One. I think I'm kind of on your side in this debate. It's what Laffy argues. He postulates there's "Realization," which is noticing you are not the seaprate self, but you're still a drip, and then there's "Awakening" where you become more "saintly." I'm neither. But think I'll skip the big "R" component. I believe in many instances there's proprtional relationship between it and psychopathy. Maybe too strong a statement there.
|
|