|
|
Post by enigma on May 20, 2014 23:20:15 GMT -5
Is the ambiguity in the body, or is the body in the ambiguity?  . I'll be announcing the winner of the magic question contest at the end of the week. Stay tuned!  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2014 23:24:58 GMT -5
It's not missing, it's never been there. The awareness of the body has never been there? In what sense? In an experiential sense. I never experience the millions of perceptions that make up the concept of a body as a unified experience. In one moment I might experience a feeling, in the next a sound, in the next a sight. It's thought that fills in all the missing perceptions and imagines a body. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2014 23:29:21 GMT -5
You are both working from the assumption that there is an 'out there' that is occurring pseudo independent of whats going on 'in here', and that whats 'in here' is picking up on whats out there by whatever mechanism you model... No in here or out there, all just thoughts... No, actually, the context of that dichotomy was established by what you wrote here: Ahh...I forgot that many of you are only just now beginning to realize that all of these appearances are just aggregated sensory perceptions happening in the mind, with no independent 'reality' of their own lol Without someone to appear to, there are no appearances, and without one to sense, there are no senses: perception requires a perceiver. "Universal Mind"?  Haha...Leaving aside Universal Mind as an unknowable idea, the 'sensor' herself is only an appearance...subject and object are the same...both a part of the same Happening. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2014 23:33:57 GMT -5
Okay....I think you'll find me somewhat less insistent lol You seem to enjoy viewing thoughts as something that has a 'realness' and independence from yourself....far be it from me to get between a boy and his toys :-) Sorry, I don't know what your talking about. You think maybe I should add that to my list of investigations? I never said you 'should' investigate anything, I said you CAN investigate the questions YOU asked all by yourself...see the difference? ;-) |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on May 20, 2014 23:34:00 GMT -5
<tmt> We can distinguish between pure sensation -- the information that is generated by our eyes, ears, nose, mouth and skin -- and derivative information based on that, and then note that all of it can be modeled by neural activity and then in turn refer to that activity -- all of it, including pure sensation -- as "thought". </tmt> Pretty good, cept that bolded bit is a bit off ;-) To me, separating sensory perceptions from the rest of the 'field of thought' is a bit like Earnest separating his wrist from his arm. ;-) I stopped doing doing that some distance ago. Yeah, the body and all of it's sense organs is also appearances appearing in mind. It's an odd thing, really, to use the mind to separate what appears inside the mind from what appears outside the mind. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2014 23:37:28 GMT -5
Pretty good, cept that bolded bit is a bit off ;-) To me, separating sensory perceptions from the rest of the 'field of thought' is a bit like Earnest separating his wrist from his arm. ;-) I stopped doing doing that some distance ago. Yeah, the body and all of it's sense organs are also appearances appearing in mind. It's an odd thing, really, to use the mind to separate what appears inside the mind from what appears outside the mind. Yeah...or said a different way, its odd to use the mind separate a more innerer part of mind from a more outerer part of mind lol |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2014 23:39:23 GMT -5
Sorry I don't understand, you think sensations are thoughts? Seeing is a thought? Hearing is a thought? And tasting is a thought? And all these perceptions and thoughts happen in a mind? Where did you think sensory perceptions were happening? In awareness? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2014 23:43:00 GMT -5
Sorry, I don't know what your talking about. You think maybe I should add that to my list of investigations? I never said you 'should' investigate anything, I said you CAN investigate the questions YOU asked all by yourself...see the difference? ;-) 'Can' or 'Should' it isn't going to happen. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on May 20, 2014 23:49:20 GMT -5
Shorry, it's necessary to ask you a few questions before your winnings can be transferred to your bank account. So what you mean to say is that your attention is focused on the bodily senses? Uhhh.... yes and no. For this dude right here (moi), attention sort of just goes wherever it goes. Thinking of it in terms of focusing attention on x, y, or z seems a little distracting to me. Originally that's how it worked, but eventually it shifted beyond that. Now it's more....fluid? To steal an idea from Bruce Lee, everything feels like water (not literally). The wind blows and the leaves rustle; person A asks and person B answers. When one thing pushes, something else pulls...that sort of thing. ATA, for me, is more along the lines of awareness (intentionally directed or not) of this fluid relationship between everything. I used to try and cut thoughts out, but now that seems hilarious. Thoughts, to me, are just another sort of relationship (i.e. - distracted by thought, the world we're aware of draws inward and shrinks). I don't like using words because they can very easily be misunderstood (which I'm sure you're aware of), but if I had to I'd say it's more like a visually impaired person putting on glasses. Nothing has changed in the world, but everything is suddenly very clear. Does that help any? "Where are you when you ata-mt? The body." I'm just asking you what you mean by that. It's silly to worry about using words on a discussion forum. Why not live dangerously? Take a ride on the wild side. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2014 0:00:38 GMT -5
I never said you 'should' investigate anything, I said you CAN investigate the questions YOU asked all by yourself...see the difference? ;-) 'Can' or 'Should' it isn't going to happen. CONGRATULATIONS! Also, why not? and also, do you suddenly have volition now, that allows you to commit to: "It isn't going to happen"  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2014 0:04:13 GMT -5
Where did you think sensory perceptions were happening? In awareness? Enigma and I kinda expanded the definition of mind recently, if you missed it, then your question maybe makes sense. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on May 21, 2014 0:24:49 GMT -5
The awareness of the body has never been there? In what sense? In an experiential sense. I never experience the millions of perceptions that make up the concept of a body as a unified experience. In one moment I might experience a feeling, in the next a sound, in the next a sight. It's thought that fills in all the missing perceptions and imagines a body. I thought we were talking about awareness of the body. Why are you talking about millions of perceptions and unified experience? You are aware of your body. Arms, legs, head, that sort of thing. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on May 21, 2014 0:30:11 GMT -5
Where did you think sensory perceptions were happening? In awareness? Okay, I'll call your context hop, and raise you one more. Where is this awareness that stuff happens inside? |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on May 21, 2014 0:32:06 GMT -5
I never said you 'should' investigate anything, I said you CAN investigate the questions YOU asked all by yourself...see the difference? ;-) 'Can' or 'Should' it isn't going to happen. You seem quite determined. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2014 0:46:11 GMT -5
'Can' or 'Should' it isn't going to happen. You seem quite determined. Yeah He Does! I winder what desire that particular 'determination' is feeding... |
|
