|
Post by enigma on Dec 9, 2019 11:34:17 GMT -5
I absorb little bits from what I see posted, I don't read spiritual books, but from several quotes I have read from Ramana I resonate with him also (not all of them). When you give your dogs a cuddle, I am sure most don't take into account what they have read someone else say about not being real or not being here .. (This really is part of the problem as I see, it because if a dude really didn't believe they nor the dog was anything butt real then they will be in some type of denial when trying to in someway come to terms with loving something that isn't really here and such likes . I haven't met a dude as yet that behaves like there is noone here or that they believe themselves to be unreal / false / illusory etc etc and I think that in itself speaks louder than words .. In a way, that’s why you’re drawn to these discussions. But yeah, the pointers and facts of the matter do apparently upset you. The interactions provide indications of certain illusions you hold tightly, while others seem to betray a certain confusion both on what is is being said and what you think you understand. Being that you kinda start digging in and/or lashing out, the conversations tend to stop there or head off into an arching circle with a likely return to where it began, the same there. Yes.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 9, 2019 11:39:10 GMT -5
A thought is not a sensation. A thought is a word spoken "in your head."
There can be Awarness without Awareness of separately existing phenomenon. If no words (thoughts) arise, there is unity; no separation. Even without sensations this applies, but it's difficult to grasp Being without a world. Nah not at all .. a thought is a thought, it can be an insight, it can be intuition based, a feeling or a sense .. I agree with Roy on the definition of thoughts. You may be mistaking thoughts that follow a feeling, etc for the actual feeling.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 9, 2019 11:49:53 GMT -5
Yes, it was an observation based on the misunderstandings you have continuously expressed since you started posting here. Nothing more. I stand by it until you can show anything to the contrary. The misunderstandings are with you . I haven't speculated in the way you have . You are welcome to back up you claim if you wish otherwise it's pure speculation and it's in very poor taste . . Your last comment in reply to a post of mine was peace and you left my thoughts unanswered . Then you interject on my post with another in a manner that doesn't express the peace you supposedly expressed . Not a genuine expression . I assumed it was an expression of a desire to end that discussion with no hard feelings, not necessarily a perpetual blessing.
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Dec 9, 2019 20:29:50 GMT -5
The misunderstandings are with you . I haven't speculated in the way you have . You are welcome to back up you claim if you wish otherwise it's pure speculation and it's in very poor taste . . Your last comment in reply to a post of mine was peace and you left my thoughts unanswered . Then you interject on my post with another in a manner that doesn't express the peace you supposedly expressed . Not a genuine expression . I assumed it was an expression of a desire to end that discussion with no hard feelings, not necessarily a perpetual blessing. I'll never tell. 🤐
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Dec 10, 2019 2:57:07 GMT -5
For sure, in my eyes the analogy doesn't work, completely different situations butt as said I know the pilgrim mean't well .. butt it is important to stick to the situation at hand here .. Being aware of something, is the same as having a thought about something . You can't be aware of something while declaring transcendence . It doesn't matter what one is aware of, but if there is awareness of something there is mindfulness . I mean wtf has transcended and wtf is aware of something just because there is the suggestion that there isn't thinking going on .. Intelligence as a suggestion doesn't mean nuffin to me .. You're right that mind is not gone, it hasn't ceased functioning when there are still unconscious recognition processes going on, but ZD has mentioned that and wouldn't disagree. What's being pointed out by a few others is just that active, conscious thinking can stop, and one will remain functional, which is no small thing. You might even agree with that. The argument seems to be about transcendence of mind. You're saying mind is still present. It is, but transcendence is an inclusive process and doesn't mean mind is gone, it's just operating differently. I have spent an age speaking about the differences between 'thought' and thinking . I have said so myself that one doesn't have to have an internal chat about the weather in order to have a thought of it . I am in no disagreement with this at all and I haven't said otherwise .. What I am saying is that while there is perception there is thought and there is mind . You can't be aware of the tree and have transcended thought and mind . Peeps seem to think that just by stopping the chit chat they have transcended mind when it is incorrect . The mind can entertain silence for beyond mind is beyond silence . There is a difference butt peeps don't seem to know of it . Niz's quote I posted a few times earlier is to this very point but peeps for some reason still don't get it and would perhaps rather like to believe that they have transcended mind just because they have experienced silent thought .
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Dec 10, 2019 3:14:43 GMT -5
Nah not at all .. a thought is a thought, it can be an insight, it can be intuition based, a feeling or a sense .. I agree with Roy on the definition of thoughts. You may be mistaking thoughts that follow a feeling, etc for the actual feeling. We are all entitled to our opinions and definitions .. There are many different examples on the net some support my understanding some don't, I think the important thing is to explain one's theory and say why we see things as we do, and that is what I do . You can't have a feeling beyond mind and the mind is thought based . You can't separate I am aware with the thought of it . Try it, don't take my word for it . Then entertain a thought of Marie . There is no difference even if one wants to create an image of Marie in one's mind . The foundation of thought is the same . At no point does one have to chat about what I am is, or what Marie is wearing today .
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 10, 2019 10:00:15 GMT -5
You're right that mind is not gone, it hasn't ceased functioning when there are still unconscious recognition processes going on, but ZD has mentioned that and wouldn't disagree. What's being pointed out by a few others is just that active, conscious thinking can stop, and one will remain functional, which is no small thing. You might even agree with that. The argument seems to be about transcendence of mind. You're saying mind is still present. It is, but transcendence is an inclusive process and doesn't mean mind is gone, it's just operating differently. I have spent an age speaking about the differences between 'thought' and thinking . I have said so myself that one doesn't have to have an internal chat about the weather in order to have a thought of it . I am in no disagreement with this at all and I haven't said otherwise .. What I am saying is that while there is perception there is thought and there is mind . You can't be aware of the tree and have transcended thought and mind . Peeps seem to think that just by stopping the chit chat they have transcended mind when it is incorrect . The mind can entertain silence for beyond mind is beyond silence . There is a difference butt peeps don't seem to know of it . Niz's quote I posted a few times earlier is to this very point but peeps for some reason still don't get it and would perhaps rather like to believe that they have transcended mind just because they have experienced silent thought . Read the end of my post.
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Dec 10, 2019 10:12:01 GMT -5
I have spent an age speaking about the differences between 'thought' and thinking . I have said so myself that one doesn't have to have an internal chat about the weather in order to have a thought of it . I am in no disagreement with this at all and I haven't said otherwise .. What I am saying is that while there is perception there is thought and there is mind . You can't be aware of the tree and have transcended thought and mind . Peeps seem to think that just by stopping the chit chat they have transcended mind when it is incorrect . The mind can entertain silence for beyond mind is beyond silence . There is a difference butt peeps don't seem to know of it . Niz's quote I posted a few times earlier is to this very point but peeps for some reason still don't get it and would perhaps rather like to believe that they have transcended mind just because they have experienced silent thought . Read the end of my post. You can't transcend mind and still be of it . I haven't been interested nor have I been referring to layers of the mind in this instance, I am speaking of a world that no longer exists, I am not talking about a world that exists on different levels or layers . Not chattering about the weather while looking at the rain, isn't transcending a level of the thinking mind, it is operating from the same level, simply not thinking about it . Look at the keyboard now . Don't think about it in ways of chatter . What have you transcended, what difference does it make to you, to simply look rather than talk about it? You ask a 100 peeps and perhaps you might get many different replies, but for many I am sure will say when drawn to eventually talk about the awareness of the keyboard they will say, I still perceived the keyboard . There is no grand realization of what is .. The fingers don't start to move on their own accord do they, simply because you don't talk your self through what's happening . It's toadally flawed from this perspective .
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 10, 2019 11:13:26 GMT -5
You can't transcend mind and still be of it . I haven't been interested nor have I been referring to layers of the mind in this instance, I am speaking of a world that no longer exists, I am not talking about a world that exists on different levels or layers . Not chattering about the weather while looking at the rain, isn't transcending a level of the thinking mind, it is operating from the same level, simply not thinking about it . Look at the keyboard now . Don't think about it in ways of chatter . What have you transcended, what difference does it make to you, to simply look rather than talk about it? You ask a 100 peeps and perhaps you might get many different replies, but for many I am sure will say when drawn to eventually talk about the awareness of the keyboard they will say, I still perceived the keyboard . There is no grand realization of what is .. The fingers don't start to move on their own accord do they, simply because you don't talk your self through what's happening .
It's toadally flawed from this perspective . Nobody else is talking about functioning without mental activity or having a grand realization, as far as I can tell. Actually, I don't remember where this clusterf*ck of a conversation began.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 10, 2019 11:26:59 GMT -5
Consciousness won't be there but I AM will be emblazoned across the heavens? Something like that? Can you please just answer the question? Where is awareness located beyond the concept of I AM? Where is the sense of one's awareness? A sense of something doesn't have a location. It's silly question. Can you just answer mine?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 10, 2019 11:29:47 GMT -5
Can you please just answer the question? Where is awareness located beyond the concept of I AM? Where is the sense of one's awareness? A sense of something doesn't have a location. It's silly question. Can you just answer mine? Hi, please see the PM.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 10, 2019 11:31:48 GMT -5
You're asking for a comparison that I just spent two days giving you, and you're asking a question that I just got through showing as misconceived. This is how you come to imagine I refuse to answer your questions. Nah dude, you referred to my understandings of 'there is only what we are' by suggesting that in someway I am the creator of time and space and the natural laws . By asking you what I have in regards to Marie was illustrating to you that what you are saying isn't contextually correct . The fact that you can't answer or won't answer shows us that .. In regards to the dream comparison, you haven't given me a comparison regarding what you have experienced as a waking experience that isn't like a dream . It's so convenient that for all my unanswered questions from you and other members here get spun around and it's my misconceptions that are to blame for the lack of them .. lol .. I see the same tactics are being played against Satch on the other forums .. It's always the other dudes fault .. You can't say the waking world is like a dream without having a comparison for it . Saying it's like a night time dream is not the opposite comparison, it is of a similar ilk . I'm done with this. Peace!
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 10, 2019 11:34:28 GMT -5
Well, omniscient, omnipresent Being can only do so much. *Shhhhhhh!* (don't tell that to the professor ...)Well, the professor doesn't live by such limitations. He can make, like, radios out of coconuts and stuff!
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 10, 2019 11:36:49 GMT -5
A sense of something doesn't have a location. It's silly question. Can you just answer mine? Hi, please see the PM. Oh, a PM. I'll check it out......
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 10, 2019 11:50:05 GMT -5
*Shhhhhhh!* (don't tell that to the professor ...) Well, the professor doesn't live by such limitations. He can make, like, radios out of coconuts and stuff! Then why can't he just fix the d@mn boat already?
|
|