|
Post by laughter on Dec 22, 2014 15:44:21 GMT -5
Conceptual exploration of a definition of mind or thought in a discussion about clarity or self-realization can be self defeating, in that the primary way of arriving at clarity isn't the means of conceptual definition. If someone insists on using one set of ideas or another to refer to the terms, this can either be accomadated or not, and in that choice the intent toward the dialog becomes important. Objectively speaking, it can be noticed that central to any notion of mind and thought is the question of the relationship of these artifacts to the individual. The question of the nature of that relationship, is one of self-inquiry. Noone can perform self-inquiry for anyone else. Yeah, I'd say, discussions about non-duality can only have the point of testing other peeps' actual understanding. A side effect may be that one or the other peep will lose some illusions in the process, but generating self-realization can't really be on the agenda. It's that Nansen-Joshu thang.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 22, 2014 15:45:20 GMT -5
Yes, you're right, it's not problematic, but that's not what's behind "stop thinking" in this case. Even if reefs gave you a definition, it would just be more fuel for thought.Precisely. We are already so hopelessly far off the main road and deep into the profane that I'm afraid even camel tow won't be able to help here anymore. (** discreetly diverts eyes **)
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Dec 22, 2014 20:57:52 GMT -5
Ah yes Reefs, because somehow all your posts on this forum are devoid of thinking. Yes, thinking happens on a forum when folks come to a forum to share and compare ideas and particularly when they judge one another's understanding. What exactly is it you 'think' is significant about those 'thinks' highlighted in red? Seems perhaps you 'think' they indicate something important that is somehow different in a 'bad' way from how you operate...? Ooops! Where did that negative value judgement come from again? <figgles> If one is without need or attachment to outcome, open to whatever happens, one would not have a beef with what happens, one would just allow what happens to happen. I'm guessing you have a bit of history, and a beef with folks who come here and fall short of your expectations of how you believe a dialog 'should' happen and how it 'should' not... and if so, that might be something you should 'sit with' for a bit. </figgles>
|
|
|
Post by figgles on Dec 23, 2014 0:58:15 GMT -5
Ah yes Reefs, because somehow all your posts on this forum are devoid of thinking. Yes, thinking happens on a forum when folks come to a forum to share and compare ideas and particularly when they judge one another's understanding. What exactly is it you 'think' is significant about those 'thinks' highlighted in red? Seems perhaps you 'think' they indicate something important that is somehow different in a 'bad' way from how you operate...? Ooops! Where did that negative value judgement come from again? <figgles> If one is without need or attachment to outcome, open to whatever happens, one would not have a beef with what happens, one would just allow what happens to happen. I'm guessing you have a bit of history, and a beef with folks who come here and fall short of your expectations of how you believe a dialog 'should' happen and how it 'should' not... and if so, that might be something you should 'sit with' for a bit. </figgles> If you look closely there, I'm asking a question more than making a statement. I guess that was not the case then? Okay. I give up then. What was the point of your highlighting the word 'think' in red then? And I'm pretty sure the quote you referenced was in response to your earlier attempts to designate this forum for certain folks only, while others leave for forums more suited to what you deemed to be more their cup of tea. Not really relevant to this discussion.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 23, 2014 1:21:19 GMT -5
Right, and it's from that no-mountain position that we can ask if it's really possible to know which mountain is real and which is illusion, because the fundamental assumption of objective reality is gone, and for me it never returned. 'reality' is an orphan to the extent that it applies to an objective physical reality. In my experience, the expectations and beliefs revolving around objective physical reality are a very persistent and pernicious set of conditioning that is entangled in a very complex way with our 2nd order perceptions and the process of decision making. Also, it's something that I remember actually clinging to, right up until the time I wrote this -- and by then the conscious forefront notion of it had been abandoned for years. Even after that, over these past few years, even after finally renouncing the ghost of it, bits and pieces of that conditioning still are noticed over time. There's this will to go out and rescue the orphan that gets stranded in the valley where the river is no longer a river.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Dec 23, 2014 20:31:55 GMT -5
Ooops! Where did that negative value judgement come from again? <figgles> If one is without need or attachment to outcome, open to whatever happens, one would not have a beef with what happens, one would just allow what happens to happen. I'm guessing you have a bit of history, and a beef with folks who come here and fall short of your expectations of how you believe a dialog 'should' happen and how it 'should' not... and if so, that might be something you should 'sit with' for a bit. </figgles> If you look closely there, I'm asking a question more than making a statement. I guess that was not the case then? Okay. I give up then. What was the point of your highlighting the word 'think' in red then? And I'm pretty sure the quote you referenced was in response to your earlier attempts to designate this forum for certain folks only, while others leave for forums more suited to what you deemed to be more their cup of tea. Not really relevant to this discussion. So, you don't actually know where your negative value judgement comes from? And if you look closely, then you will see that you just can't stop thinking. The quote I referenced was taken from the satsang thread where you had some beef with Gangaji. So, take your own advice for a change and sit with it. Merry Christmas!
|
|
|
Post by figgles on Dec 23, 2014 21:39:34 GMT -5
So, you don't actually know where your negative value judgement comes from? And if you look closely, then you will see that you just can't stop thinking. The quote I referenced was taken from the satsang thread where you had some beef with Gangaji. So, take your own advice for a change and sit with it.Merry Christmas! & you Reefs, just enjoy keeping on keepin on .......Marry Kristmas!
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 24, 2014 19:16:32 GMT -5
If you look closely there, I'm asking a question more than making a statement. I guess that was not the case then? Okay. I give up then. What was the point of your highlighting the word 'think' in red then? And I'm pretty sure the quote you referenced was in response to your earlier attempts to designate this forum for certain folks only, while others leave for forums more suited to what you deemed to be more their cup of tea. Not really relevant to this discussion. So, you don't actually know where your negative value judgement comes from? And if you look closely, then you will see that you just can't stop thinking. The quote I referenced was taken from the satsang thread where you had some beef with Gangaji. So, take your own advice for a change and sit with it. Merry Christmas!
|
|
|
Post by serpentqueen on Dec 25, 2014 23:33:24 GMT -5
There are appearances that are imagined, they are not real.. there are appearances that happen due to input from what is actually happening, those appearances represent what is actually happening.. awareness is the vehicle that informs consciousness, appearances aren't happening 'in' consciousness, they're just happening.. Form is energy behaving in a 'part'icular way, emptiness is the absence of form.. and, even that is a 'cut too deep'. what exists persists even in the absence of belief that it exists.. if you drive your automobile toward a tree, and refuse to believe the tree exists, the result will likely convince you that the tree does exist.. but, if you stop believing in oneness/nondulaity, nothing changes, you can have exactly the same Cosmic Consciousness Clarity without the illusion that it must be described to your satisfaction.. Reminds me of a quote: Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. Philip K D!ck What if that's just the more stubborn illusion? There are parts of our reality that were created early on because they were convenient for getting on in the world. When we get old these same parts have a way of deteriorating , ask anyone with a loved one who has dementia and is in the long care memory care unit. Ask me. My MIL is in such a situation. My MIL still exists because I believe in her. But she believes that she's 16 years old and her dad is still alive (he's been dead for 30 years) and if it's past sundown she doesn't know who I am. Her reality is re-created every few minutes. She doesn't quite live in the present (though sometimes she does)... from what I've seen, truly living in the present would be hell.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 26, 2014 17:26:44 GMT -5
Reminds me of a quote: Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. Philip K D!ck What if that's just the more stubborn illusion? There are parts of our reality that were created early on because they were convenient for getting on in the world. When we get old these same parts have a way of deteriorating , ask anyone with a loved one who has dementia and is in the long care memory care unit. Ask me. My MIL is in such a situation. My MIL still exists because I believe in her. But she believes that she's 16 years old and her dad is still alive (he's been dead for 30 years) and if it's past sundown she doesn't know who I am. Her reality is re-created every few minutes. She doesn't quite live in the present (though sometimes she does)... from what I've seen, truly living in the present would be hell.
Hey SQ. fwiw, what I've found with Alzheimer's is that they respond to emotion and looking back telling them that there where things they did in the past that indebted others to them who would help them now was a message that I'd repeat daily. Any other message about the forgotten past just makes for more suffering. It is a grim but fine example of how what Tolle and other's like mean by the present isn't really about what he calls clock time. It's just that thinking of thought and the present in terms of clock time is a useful construct for a fully functional adult to get their attention into it.
|
|