|
|
Post by satchitananda on Dec 12, 2019 12:26:04 GMT -5
Wow you're telling me that I can actually turn left off the highway to go home without thinking in my head, "I must turn left now". I can just turn in silence? It must have taken years of daily meditation practice for hours and hours every day to get to that level. I suppose you'll be telling me next that if I look at a clock I don't have to think in my head, "the big hand is on the 12 and the little hand is on the 5 so that means it's 5 o' clock. 😀 I could notice the time in total silence? Get outta here! Satch: You and many posters here understand what I'm pointing to, but for some reason other people don't. I do understand what you're saying. I was just having a bit of fun. The problem is that what you describe sounds like something everyone can do because everyone is capable of carrying out tasks on autopilot without conscious thought. It is normal. What you are pointing to though is a much deeper stillness/awareness that exists alongside unconscious action with a falling away of self reflective mental chatter. The autopilot aspect still sounds just like what everyone can do though but this profound stillness cannot really be described, whereas lack of conscious thinking can be described and most people will easily relate to that, but if one doesn't experience this stillness as well then it doesn't sound like anything special. I hope that makes sense. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 12, 2019 12:41:32 GMT -5
Satch: You and many posters here understand what I'm pointing to, but for some reason other people don't. I do understand what you're saying. I was just having a bit of fun. The problem is that what you describe sounds like something everyone can do because everyone is capable of carrying out tasks on autopilot without conscious thought. It is normal. What you are pointing to though is a much deeper stillness/awareness that exists alongside unconscious action with a falling away of self reflective mental chatter. The autopilot aspect still sounds just like what everyone can do though but this profound stillness cannot really be described, whereas lack of conscious thinking can be described and most people will easily relate to that, but if one doesn't experience this stillness as well then it doesn't sound like anything special. I hope that makes sense. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 12, 2019 12:59:03 GMT -5
This is why I ask the question, why do you carry on doing conditioned actions .. Why clean up dog poop? The dog poop is still seen as dog poop and one still lives in a conditioned way where they know it is unhygienic to leave it on your kitchen floor . You can't pretend to be seeing anything 'as it is' prior to the label if you are going to abide by the labels meaning and reference still . There is no difference here, thinking about the poop and simply clearing it up while not thinking . If there is an ego conditioned action, there is a thought of self in reflection of the action . Butt it sounds far grander and way more spiritual and floaty if you clean up the mess without thinking about it . I'm going to Report this post Tenka. You've been asking grown men why would they pick up dog sh!t for two years now. I for one am bored with it. You would report a post because you are bored with the content? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 12, 2019 13:23:41 GMT -5
I'm going to Report this post Tenka. You've been asking grown men why would they pick up dog sh!t for two years now. I for one am bored with it. You would report a post because you are bored with the content? In this case it seems so, yes. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Dec 12, 2019 14:05:45 GMT -5
Satch: You and many posters here understand what I'm pointing to, but for some reason other people don't. I do understand what you're saying. I was just having a bit of fun. The problem is that what you describe sounds like something everyone can do because everyone is capable of carrying out tasks on autopilot without conscious thought. It is normal. What you are pointing to though is a much deeper stillness/awareness that exists alongside unconscious action with a falling away of self reflective mental chatter. The autopilot aspect still sounds just like what everyone can do though but this profound stillness cannot really be described, whereas lack of conscious thinking can be described and most people will easily relate to that, but if one doesn't experience this stillness as well then it doesn't sound like anything special. I hope that makes sense. I'll give an exact opposite view. It's annoying for me to be in the presence of my sister. She virtually never stops talking. A great deal of that talking is simply the way she processes ~stuff~. I learned this only a couple of years ago, as I pushed her on this annoying trait. She basically said she processes thought by thinking out loud (instead of like most 'normal' people, silently). This was quite a revelation to me. That probably means nothing and so is a waste of time posting. .....Oh...and, she is always asking questions... Very annoying also. I mean stupid trivial stuff. Sometimes now, I just don't answer, period. And sometimes respond: You don't have to know everything. I guess I will stop there.... |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 12, 2019 14:20:19 GMT -5
I'm going to Report this post Tenka. You've been asking grown men why would they pick up dog sh!t for two years now. I for one am bored with it. The reason why I use this analogy often as well as self grooming is because it involves the actions of the ego self, in discriminating and discerning what is morally right for use of a better word for the individual rather than not cleaning it up or self grooming is or would be . I have also used the analogy of the supposed non ego Guru type who prefers to wear a robe rather than go butt naked, or prefers to wash and brush teeth rather than not .. All self ego's preferred conditioned actions is the point I am making . If you are offended by these analogies, especially the clearing up of dogs poop then you are quite welcome to report it . I deliberately used this analogy because it is messy in more ways than one, and if you had no ego you would not be swayed by the effects of it being spread out on your kitchen floor . I didn't have you down for one to be easily offended by something as trivial as this on the back of how you express yourself here at times.I suppose it's one rule for one and another for another .. It's a valid point. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 12, 2019 15:01:50 GMT -5
the word 'distinctions' is the tricky one. What zd is describing I guess, is the state of 'sahaja samadhi', which is very different from the normal human state. But, I agree with you that in this state, there is mind, and when driving, one still has to know whether to turn left or right, to go when light turns green etc i.e distinctions are still made. Could perhaps say that 'distinctions' are being made but in a different way, or that they are experienced differently such that there is a greater sense of flow or grace.....? Yes, I am pointing to the state of sahaja samadhi, and it is quite different, psychologically, than what we might call "the ordinary way of interacting with the world" via ideas about reality. Most conventional distinctions about what things are have already been made in the past, so reflective mind talk is not necessary for knowing the world. It is known directly--gnossis. The intellect is consequently a servant rather than a master. Mind talk is not a problem, but ideational thinking is no longer dominant. Yes, there is still mind because there is subconscious mental activity, but there's no longer a belief in a SVP at the center for whatever is happening, so there's no conscious self-referential thinking, and there is a far more cosmic sense of identity. We might call it "a felt sense of oneness with what is." In Hindu terminology, there is only Brahman and this is how it manifests--typing words on a computer keyboard. The phrase "what is" is clearly a concept, but it's used to point to the unified field of being that's seen and interacted with when there is no mind talk. As SDP pointed out, it is not necessary to think about riding a bicycle after one has learned to ride it. From my POV it's more existentially accurate to say, "I see what is," than to say, "I see trees, clouds, and people outside my window." The first statement refers to the entire visual field as a unified whole whereas the second statement refers to the visual field as divided into distinct/abstract/artificial/imaginary states having imaginary sets of boundaries. If I'm talking to someone who knows nothing about ND, then I use conventional language, but on this forum most people are familiar with ND, so I use language that points to what cannot be captured by language. The phrase "what is" points to oneness. Because Tenka refuses to differentiate between thoughts as mind talk and thoughts as direct sensory perception or feelings, it's unlikely that he'll ever agree with what most of us write about ND or the state of SS. That's perfectly okay with me, but it pretty much eliminates any interest in going further with this issue. To clarify the last two lines you wrote, I would put it this way, "When driving, one knows whether to turn left or right, etc, but distinctions are NOT being made. Distinctions were made in the past about "left", "right," etc, and were internalized subconsciously, so although there is mind, there is no conscious reflective thought involved in what's happening. There is no thought of 'I must turn right at the next intersection.' The character knows what to do in total mental silence because body and mind are in a state of unified flow, and it doesn't have to think about what to do." I'm going to side with Tenka on this issue. You used to call it body knowledge and I didn't have enough of an issue with it to go into it, but now it's 'mind and body in a state of unified flow while in total mental silence', and I officially have problems with that. You specifically talk about a common driving experience, so let's leave samadhi states out of it. I define mind as any mental cognitive activity, so I say mind is not in total mental silence, only the conscious thoughts have ceased. There's some very sophisticated processing going on at an unconscious level in order to successfully accomplish the driving experience. This is evidenced by the fact that nobody who has never learned to drive can accomplish this. The fact that you're not conscious of that processing doesn't mean it's some kind of mind/body state of unified flow. Fact of the matter is, most things can be done more efficiently without the interference of conscious thinking. Having said that, maybe you mean it's more akin to a state of flow as most of us know it, and I would agree with that, but I would still say mind is quite active and not 'totally silent'. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Dec 12, 2019 15:35:32 GMT -5
Satch: You and many posters here understand what I'm pointing to, but for some reason other people don't. I do understand what you're saying. I was just having a bit of fun. The problem is that what you describe sounds like something everyone can do because everyone is capable of carrying out tasks on autopilot without conscious thought. It is normal. What you are pointing to though is a much deeper stillness/awareness that exists alongside unconscious action with a falling away of self reflective mental chatter. The autopilot aspect still sounds just like what everyone can do though but this profound stillness cannot really be described, whereas lack of conscious thinking can be described and most people will easily relate to that, but if one doesn't experience this stillness as well then it doesn't sound like anything special. I hope that makes sense. Exactly. You've said it well. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Dec 12, 2019 15:42:39 GMT -5
I do understand what you're saying. I was just having a bit of fun. The problem is that what you describe sounds like something everyone can do because everyone is capable of carrying out tasks on autopilot without conscious thought. It is normal. What you are pointing to though is a much deeper stillness/awareness that exists alongside unconscious action with a falling away of self reflective mental chatter. The autopilot aspect still sounds just like what everyone can do though but this profound stillness cannot really be described, whereas lack of conscious thinking can be described and most people will easily relate to that, but if one doesn't experience this stillness as well then it doesn't sound like anything special. I hope that makes sense. Beautiful! Yes. One of the things that always grabs and holds my attention after a day or so of silent hiking in the woods are the root systems of trees. They perfectly exhibit the inseparable unity underlying everything (every thing). |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Dec 12, 2019 15:51:47 GMT -5
Yes, I am pointing to the state of sahaja samadhi, and it is quite different, psychologically, than what we might call "the ordinary way of interacting with the world" via ideas about reality. Most conventional distinctions about what things are have already been made in the past, so reflective mind talk is not necessary for knowing the world. It is known directly--gnossis. The intellect is consequently a servant rather than a master. Mind talk is not a problem, but ideational thinking is no longer dominant. Yes, there is still mind because there is subconscious mental activity, but there's no longer a belief in a SVP at the center for whatever is happening, so there's no conscious self-referential thinking, and there is a far more cosmic sense of identity. We might call it "a felt sense of oneness with what is." In Hindu terminology, there is only Brahman and this is how it manifests--typing words on a computer keyboard. The phrase "what is" is clearly a concept, but it's used to point to the unified field of being that's seen and interacted with when there is no mind talk. As SDP pointed out, it is not necessary to think about riding a bicycle after one has learned to ride it. From my POV it's more existentially accurate to say, "I see what is," than to say, "I see trees, clouds, and people outside my window." The first statement refers to the entire visual field as a unified whole whereas the second statement refers to the visual field as divided into distinct/abstract/artificial/imaginary states having imaginary sets of boundaries. If I'm talking to someone who knows nothing about ND, then I use conventional language, but on this forum most people are familiar with ND, so I use language that points to what cannot be captured by language. The phrase "what is" points to oneness. Because Tenka refuses to differentiate between thoughts as mind talk and thoughts as direct sensory perception or feelings, it's unlikely that he'll ever agree with what most of us write about ND or the state of SS. That's perfectly okay with me, but it pretty much eliminates any interest in going further with this issue. To clarify the last two lines you wrote, I would put it this way, "When driving, one knows whether to turn left or right, etc, but distinctions are NOT being made. Distinctions were made in the past about "left", "right," etc, and were internalized subconsciously, so although there is mind, there is no conscious reflective thought involved in what's happening. There is no thought of 'I must turn right at the next intersection.' The character knows what to do in total mental silence because body and mind are in a state of unified flow, and it doesn't have to think about what to do." I'm going to side with Tenka on this issue. You used to call it body knowledge and I didn't have enough of an issue with it to go into it, but now it's 'mind and body in a state of unified flow while in total mental silence', and I officially have problems with that. You specifically talk about a common driving experience, so let's leave samadhi states out of it. I define mind as any mental cognitive activity, so I say mind is not in total mental silence, only the conscious thoughts have ceased. There's some very sophisticated processing going on at an unconscious level in order to successfully accomplish the driving experience. This is evidenced by the fact that nobody who has never learned to drive can accomplish this. The fact that you're not conscious of that processing doesn't mean it's some kind of mind/body state of unified flow. Fact of the matter is, most things can be done more efficiently without the interference of conscious thinking. Having said that, maybe you mean it's more akin to a state of flow as most of us know it, and I would agree with that, but I would still say mind is quite active and not 'totally silent'. Yes. I have no problem with the idea that mind (if defined as subconscious mental processing) is still active and functional while in the absence of mind talk. And yes; when there is no mind talk (especially self-referential mind talk), there is a much greater sense of flow--what Zazeniac refers to as "mushin." |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 12, 2019 16:33:44 GMT -5
Yes, I am pointing to the state of sahaja samadhi, and it is quite different, psychologically, than what we might call "the ordinary way of interacting with the world" via ideas about reality. Most conventional distinctions about what things are have already been made in the past, so reflective mind talk is not necessary for knowing the world. It is known directly--gnossis. The intellect is consequently a servant rather than a master. Mind talk is not a problem, but ideational thinking is no longer dominant. Yes, there is still mind because there is subconscious mental activity, but there's no longer a belief in a SVP at the center for whatever is happening, so there's no conscious self-referential thinking, and there is a far more cosmic sense of identity. We might call it "a felt sense of oneness with what is." In Hindu terminology, there is only Brahman and this is how it manifests--typing words on a computer keyboard. The phrase "what is" is clearly a concept, but it's used to point to the unified field of being that's seen and interacted with when there is no mind talk. As SDP pointed out, it is not necessary to think about riding a bicycle after one has learned to ride it. From my POV it's more existentially accurate to say, "I see what is," than to say, "I see trees, clouds, and people outside my window." The first statement refers to the entire visual field as a unified whole whereas the second statement refers to the visual field as divided into distinct/abstract/artificial/imaginary states having imaginary sets of boundaries. If I'm talking to someone who knows nothing about ND, then I use conventional language, but on this forum most people are familiar with ND, so I use language that points to what cannot be captured by language. The phrase "what is" points to oneness. Because Tenka refuses to differentiate between thoughts as mind talk and thoughts as direct sensory perception or feelings, it's unlikely that he'll ever agree with what most of us write about ND or the state of SS. That's perfectly okay with me, but it pretty much eliminates any interest in going further with this issue. To clarify the last two lines you wrote, I would put it this way, "When driving, one knows whether to turn left or right, etc, but distinctions are NOT being made. Distinctions were made in the past about "left", "right," etc, and were internalized subconsciously, so although there is mind, there is no conscious reflective thought involved in what's happening. There is no thought of 'I must turn right at the next intersection.' The character knows what to do in total mental silence because body and mind are in a state of unified flow, and it doesn't have to think about what to do." I'm going to side with Tenka on this issue. You used to call it body knowledge and I didn't have enough of an issue with it to go into it, but now it's 'mind and body in a state of unified flow while in total mental silence', and I officially have problems with that. You specifically talk about a common driving experience, so let's leave samadhi states out of it. I define mind as any mental cognitive activity, so I say mind is not in total mental silence, only the conscious thoughts have ceased. There's some very sophisticated processing going on at an unconscious level in order to successfully accomplish the driving experience. This is evidenced by the fact that nobody who has never learned to drive can accomplish this. The fact that you're not conscious of that processing doesn't mean it's some kind of mind/body state of unified flow. Fact of the matter is, most things can be done more efficiently without the interference of conscious thinking. Having said that, maybe you mean it's more akin to a state of flow as most of us know it, and I would agree with that, but I would still say mind is quite active and not 'totally silent'. Said it very well. I argued with him in this same place in the past when he said 'THAT' knows how to drive. Its not THAT but learnt subconscious process and it can't be compared with body knowing. And your excellent point 'This is evidenced by the fact that nobody who has never learnt to drive can accomplish this' becomes irrefutable. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Dec 12, 2019 16:46:52 GMT -5
I'm going to side with Tenka on this issue. You used to call it body knowledge and I didn't have enough of an issue with it to go into it, but now it's 'mind and body in a state of unified flow while in total mental silence', and I officially have problems with that. You specifically talk about a common driving experience, so let's leave samadhi states out of it. I define mind as any mental cognitive activity, so I say mind is not in total mental silence, only the conscious thoughts have ceased. There's some very sophisticated processing going on at an unconscious level in order to successfully accomplish the driving experience. This is evidenced by the fact that nobody who has never learned to drive can accomplish this. The fact that you're not conscious of that processing doesn't mean it's some kind of mind/body state of unified flow. Fact of the matter is, most things can be done more efficiently without the interference of conscious thinking. Having said that, maybe you mean it's more akin to a state of flow as most of us know it, and I would agree with that, but I would still say mind is quite active and not 'totally silent'. Said it very well. I argued with him in this same place in the past when he said 'THAT' knows how to drive. Its not THAT but learnt subconscious process and it can't be compared with body knowing. And your excellent point 'This is evidenced by the fact that nobody who has never learnt to drive can accomplish this' becomes irrefutable. i told tenka a couple of days ago that he and you were quite aligned on this matter  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 12, 2019 16:56:46 GMT -5
Said it very well. I argued with him in this same place in the past when he said 'THAT' knows how to drive. Its not THAT but learnt subconscious process and it can't be compared with body knowing. And your excellent point 'This is evidenced by the fact that nobody who has never learnt to drive can accomplish this' becomes irrefutable. i told tenka a couple of days ago that he and you were quite aligned on this matter oh great! It can easily be noticed. Walking is a body knowing for reptile but learnt subconscious thing for human. Nature left certain things for us to learn before we proceed further. And this kind of choosing between human and reptile proves that it definitely has not fallen into the dream and it perfectly aware of how to create our individual experience. Nature decides as Ramesh Balsekar put it. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 12, 2019 17:38:04 GMT -5
I'm going to side with Tenka on this issue. You used to call it body knowledge and I didn't have enough of an issue with it to go into it, but now it's 'mind and body in a state of unified flow while in total mental silence', and I officially have problems with that. You specifically talk about a common driving experience, so let's leave samadhi states out of it. I define mind as any mental cognitive activity, so I say mind is not in total mental silence, only the conscious thoughts have ceased. There's some very sophisticated processing going on at an unconscious level in order to successfully accomplish the driving experience. This is evidenced by the fact that nobody who has never learned to drive can accomplish this. The fact that you're not conscious of that processing doesn't mean it's some kind of mind/body state of unified flow. Fact of the matter is, most things can be done more efficiently without the interference of conscious thinking. Having said that, maybe you mean it's more akin to a state of flow as most of us know it, and I would agree with that, but I would still say mind is quite active and not 'totally silent'. Yes. I have no problem with the idea that mind (if defined as subconscious mental processing) is still active and functional while in the absence of mind talk. And yes; when there is no mind talk (especially self-referential mind talk), there is a much greater sense of flow--what Zazeniac refers to as "mushin." The descriptions and definitions we each favor depend on how we each want to think about it.  |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 12, 2019 23:41:21 GMT -5
You would report a post because you are bored with the content? In this case it seems so, yes. Well, okay then.  |
|
