|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 13, 2014 20:54:30 GMT -5
If my asking about 'cells already being self-realized' is TMT overkill, then surely the assigning of 'self realization' to cells of the body has to itself be TMT...? He already explained that here, the TMT started with this: But then, that makes the realization you are referencing in the above, no more than the absence of mind in the mind/body equation.....? If that's your definition, then being rendered "brain dead" would be the equivalent of "realization happening", wouldn't it? ... if someone follows you down your bunny hole, it's still your bunny hole. Arguing about where the TMT started, when you're the bunny host, is WTMT. In this case the TMT started with an absence of attention to what was actually written, and that's been pointed out to you three times prior to what I'm replying to and four times total. |
|
|
|
Post by figgles on Dec 13, 2014 21:01:00 GMT -5
Click this link, and read the big green letters. Right. I asserted that Reefs says that mind is not involved in realization. What he is saying there in green, is that Mind must be involved in "Experience," but he also goes on to say that realization IS NOT an experience. He is therefore saying that realization does not involve mind. |
|
|
|
Post by figgles on Dec 13, 2014 21:05:09 GMT -5
If my asking about 'cells already being self-realized' is TMT overkill, then surely the assigning of 'self realization' to cells of the body has to itself be TMT...? He already explained that here, the TMT started with this: But then, that makes the realization you are referencing in the above, no more than the absence of mind in the mind/body equation.....? If that's your definition, then being rendered "brain dead" would be the equivalent of "realization happening", wouldn't it? ... if someone follows you down your bunny hole, it's still your bunny hole. Arguing about where the TMT started, when you're the bunny host, is WTMT. In this case the TMT started with an absence of attention to what was actually written, and that's been pointed out to you three times prior to what I'm replying to and four times total. Go back and read the quote in green. He is not saying that 'mind is involved in realization.' He is saying that mind is involved in 'experience' and that 'realization is not an experience.' The absence of attention is yours. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 13, 2014 21:06:01 GMT -5
Click this link, and read the big green letters. Right. I asserted that Reefs says that mind is not involved in realization. What he is saying there in green, is that Mind must be involved in "Experience," but he also goes on to say that realization IS NOT an experience. He is therefore saying that realization does not involve mind. It involves mind in the orientation to mind -- in your vocabulary, it's transcendent of it. Realization is acausal and mind will be informed by conditions such that it might attach to a story about realization or it might learn of acausality. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 13, 2014 21:07:24 GMT -5
He already explained that here, the TMT started with this: ... if someone follows you down your bunny hole, it's still your bunny hole. Arguing about where the TMT started, when you're the bunny host, is WTMT. In this case the TMT started with an absence of attention to what was actually written, and that's been pointed out to you three times prior to what I'm replying to and four times total. Go back and read the quote in green. He is not saying that 'mind is involved in realization.' He is saying that mind is involved in 'experience' and that 'realization is not an experience.' The absence of attention is yours. Please attend the words on the page. In this subthread of dialog the topic is TMT and where it started. Your question about realization in terms of brain death was the start of the TMT and your resisting that is WTMT. |
|
|
|
Post by figgles on Dec 13, 2014 21:09:19 GMT -5
Right. I asserted that Reefs says that mind is not involved in realization. What he is saying there in green, is that Mind must be involved in "Experience," but he also goes on to say that realization IS NOT an experience. He is therefore saying that realization does not involve mind. in the orientation to mind -- in your vocabulary, it's transcendent of it. Realization is acausal and mind will be informed by conditions such that it might attach to a story about realization or it might learn of acausality. What?  ?...... You can seriously read the quote below and still maintain that Reefs was saying that realization involves mind?  and no, there is nothing there that resembles or resonates with my vocabulary.  Not only are you putting words in Reefs mouth, now you're putting them in mine.  Read more: spiritualteachers.proboards.com/thread/3793/never-learn?page=2#ixzz3LplflWyb |
|
|
|
Post by figgles on Dec 13, 2014 21:18:26 GMT -5
Go back and read the quote in green. He is not saying that 'mind is involved in realization.' He is saying that mind is involved in 'experience' and that 'realization is not an experience.' The absence of attention is yours. Please attend the words on the page. In this subthread of dialog the topic is TMT and where it started. Your question about realization in terms of brain death was the start of the TMT and your resisting that is WTMT. Believe it or not, I'm sincerely interested in hearing more about "the cells of the body already being self-realized." Clearly Reefs operates under a different understanding of self-realization than my own, and I'm curious to hear more about it, as I suspect it will likely shed light on some of our other differences of opinion. If that's TMT, so be it. He's the one that introduced the idea of cells of the body being self realized, not me. Again, it's an interesting idea and one that hasn't to my knowledge, been talked about here before....I'd like to hear more about that from him. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 13, 2014 21:39:41 GMT -5
It involves mind in the orientation to mind -- in your vocabulary, it's transcendent of it. Realization is acausal and mind will be informed by conditions such that it might attach to a story about realization or it might learn of acausality. What? ?...... You can seriously read the quote below and still maintain that Reefs was saying that realization involves mind? and no, there is nothing there that resembles or resonates with my vocabulary. Not only are you putting words in Reefs mouth, now you're putting them in mine. Read more: spiritualteachers.proboards.com/thread/3793/never-learn?page=2#ixzz3LplflWybWell it seems to me that you've gotten yourself so confused at this point that no matter what's written to you in reply will just result in more confusion.  |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 13, 2014 21:41:10 GMT -5
Please attend the words on the page. In this subthread of dialog the topic is TMT and where it started. Your question about realization in terms of brain death was the start of the TMT and your resisting that is WTMT. If that's TMT, so be it. He's the one that introduced the idea of cells of the body being self realized, not me.
Again, it's an interesting idea and one that hasn't to my knowledge, been talked about here before....I'd like to hear more about that from him. See? How hard was that? ... did the sky fall? Did the Earth split and swallow you up? |
|
|
|
Post by figgles on Dec 13, 2014 21:42:26 GMT -5
Well it seems to me that you've gotten yourself so confused at this point that no matter what's written to you in reply will just result in more confusion. You're the one who said that Reefs was saying the opposite to 'realization does not involve mind.' Please show me where that happened. |
|
|
|
Post by figgles on Dec 13, 2014 21:43:06 GMT -5
Believe it or not, I'm sincerely interested in hearing more about "the cells of the body already being self-realized." Clearly Reefs operates under a different understanding of self-realization than my own, and I'm curious to hear more about it, as I suspect it will likely shed light on some of our other differences of opinion. If that's TMT, so be it. He's the one that introduced the idea of cells of the body being self realized, not me.
Again, it's an interesting idea and one that hasn't to my knowledge, been talked about here before....I'd like to hear more about that from him. See? How hard was that? ... did the sky fall? Did the Earth split and swallow you up? Not at all, but it doesn't change the fact that I'd like to hear more about Reefs assertion. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 13, 2014 21:45:44 GMT -5
Well it seems to me that you've gotten yourself so confused at this point that no matter what's written to you in reply will just result in more confusion. You're the one who said that Reefs was saying the opposite to 'realization does not involve mind.' Please show me where that happened. He defines realization in that quote relative to mind. You apparently read "to mind it has to be an absence" as "mind is absent". Too much confusion. It's like quicksand. With every word you go deeper.  |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 13, 2014 21:46:51 GMT -5
See? How hard was that? ... did the sky fall? Did the Earth split and swallow you up? Not at all, but it doesn't change the fact that I'd like to hear more about Reefs assertion. It would just be more TMT. |
|
|
|
Post by figgles on Dec 13, 2014 21:48:22 GMT -5
You're the one who said that Reefs was saying the opposite to 'realization does not involve mind.' Please show me where that happened. He defines realization in that quote relative to mind. You apparently read "to mind it has to be an absence" as "mind is absent". Too much confusion. It's like quicksand. With every word you go deeper. You're now changing your tune. IN the green you were supposedly referencing Reef's assertion that 'mind was involved in realization.' Nice tap dancing.  |
|
|
|
Post by figgles on Dec 13, 2014 21:48:58 GMT -5
Not at all, but it doesn't change the fact that I'd like to hear more about Reefs assertion. It would just be more TMT. hehe...like this BS you're dishing out now, 'aint. |
|
?...... You can seriously read the quote below and still maintain that Reefs was saying that realization involves mind? 
and no, there is nothing there that resembles or resonates with my vocabulary. 
Not only are you putting words in Reefs mouth, now you're putting them in mine. 
