|
|
Post by zendancer on Dec 10, 2019 7:24:31 GMT -5
Okay, can you describe what you realized when there was no perception? Was there awareness during that time? In nirvikalpa samadhi there is is no perception of anything, but awareness remains. Zen calls it "the falling off of body and mind" because everything disappears including mental talk as well as all sensory perception. Is this what happened to you? If so, what kind of realization occurred if "you" weren't there and everything had disappeared? Driving a car and not consciously noticing anything for several minutes usually occurs because attention is focused upon mental talk and/or mental images. That's a good example of how the body can drive the car intelligently even though nothing is consciously seen or remembered afterwards. Other than the mental talk and images that are being focused upon during such a period of time, THIS, or "what is," or the cosmos, or the I Am, or something is obviously driving the car and keeping it in the correct lane. Do you think thoughts in the form of sensory perception are occurring even when there is no conscious sensory perception? I am not sure if you are addressing me here or not? Butt you just agreed with E in that 'You're right that mind is not gone' .. Butt this is the whole crux of the debate in that you have spoken about the transcendence of mind when there is no chatting .. Which is it? Do you now agree that perceiving the world silently is still mindful or not? If you want to say the mindful world is present and so is self, but one is not necessarily labelling stuff in a noisy chit chatterly way then I would agree with you here and it's nuffin special, peeps do it all the time, it's probably a daily experience for peeps, those that don't even do spiritual practices .. I am not sure if you see N.S. as being mindful or not just because nuffin is perceived as such .. I have explained my realization many times, there was no world, there was no I AM awareness or conscious thought butt if you relate your thoughts to N.S. and compare them with perceiving the world silently then you should know what I am talking about here .. The fact that you have spoken about perceiving the trees while there has been transcendence of the mind makes no sense . There seems to be a jumbled up mixture of thoughts here when you agree the mind is present, but you speak about transcendence, you speak about N.S. where there is no perception and then you speak about silently perceiving the world at large .. FWIW, I've never talked about transcendence of mind; I've only talked about transcendence of mind talk, and I've repeatedly said that I consider thoughts to be mind-talk, not direct sensory perception. I realize that you have a different definition of what the word "thought" means to you, and that's okay. I understand your POV. Like Tolle, I consider mind talk the primary activity that keeps people living a dream-like world of things and events and imagining that they're separate entities looking at a world "out there." I still want to know what your realization was when everything disappeared. For you there was an event in which everything disappeared. What did you learn from that? The event was the total disappearance of everything, but what was the realization? What did you learn as a result of that disappearance that you didn't know before? |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Dec 10, 2019 7:47:05 GMT -5
What do you not understand about there is no perception of the world when mind has been transcended? Did you understand niz's quote? I agree with what you're saying. if you are experiencing pure awareness (transcendence) then there is no world. What's the Niz quote you're referring to tenka. I can't find it. It seems as if peeps want to dress up 'there is a lighters flame' but it is seen for 'what it is', rather than as a labelled object . This defeats the whole object (excuse the pun) of there being no object to perceive in the first place be it as a labelled object or not . lol. I am finding it a little puzzling to see what is difficult about this whole scenario to be honest, I can only assume that there is complete disagreement with this concept of no world, no self, no mind (I know the pilgrim doesn't see this concept to be correct) but unless there has been a comparison for self and no self, mind and no mind like said then peeps can think that 'not thinking' means transcendence when it doesn't mean that at all . Suzanne Segal as mentioned above thought she had lost self when she hadn't, there has to be this comparison of no self that I talk about often and it still seems to some to be irrelevant or unnecessary but it's absolute paramount to have it . Z.D. has quite rightly pointed out that what is known to be N.S is beyond perception of this world, so I can't figure out why he would suggest that one can still perceive the world, grab a beer and drive a car beyond the thought of it and beyond the thought of this world . I don't understand how peeps believe that the physical mind-body can carry on walking and driving when there is no awareness of the world, or no thought of the world .. To even suggest there is subconscious activity means there is self awareness of this world on a subconscious level, which also means that mind hasn't been transcended .. We are either speaking about the mindful world being transcended or we are not .. I am not speaking about the levels and layers that laffy was talking about I am solely talking about and interested in the transcendence of mind . The mind-bodies intelligence doesn't move out the way of an elephant when there is transcendence because there is no elephant, no world, no perception, no mind-body, no thought . I would agree that your Atmananda quote has the same meaning to it as Niz's .. |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Dec 10, 2019 8:42:35 GMT -5
I am not sure if you are addressing me here or not? Butt you just agreed with E in that 'You're right that mind is not gone' .. Butt this is the whole crux of the debate in that you have spoken about the transcendence of mind when there is no chatting .. Which is it? Do you now agree that perceiving the world silently is still mindful or not? If you want to say the mindful world is present and so is self, but one is not necessarily labelling stuff in a noisy chit chatterly way then I would agree with you here and it's nuffin special, peeps do it all the time, it's probably a daily experience for peeps, those that don't even do spiritual practices .. I am not sure if you see N.S. as being mindful or not just because nuffin is perceived as such .. I have explained my realization many times, there was no world, there was no I AM awareness or conscious thought butt if you relate your thoughts to N.S. and compare them with perceiving the world silently then you should know what I am talking about here .. The fact that you have spoken about perceiving the trees while there has been transcendence of the mind makes no sense . There seems to be a jumbled up mixture of thoughts here when you agree the mind is present, but you speak about transcendence, you speak about N.S. where there is no perception and then you speak about silently perceiving the world at large .. FWIW, I've never talked about transcendence of mind; I've only talked about transcendence of mind talk, and I've repeatedly said that I consider thoughts to be mind-talk, not direct sensory perception. I realize that you have a different definition of what the word "thought" means to you, and that's okay. I understand your POV. Like Tolle, I consider mind talk the primary activity that keeps people living a dream-like world of things and events and imagining that they're separate entities looking at a world "out there." I still want to know what your realization was when everything disappeared. For you there was an event in which everything disappeared. What did you learn from that? The event was the total disappearance of everything, but what was the realization? What did you learn as a result of that disappearance that you didn't know before? So why would you say that the mind-body can still drive a car when there is no awareness of the car or the road .. This isn't the same as what has been discussed at all in regards to simply not chattering away to oneself . You speak about the mind-body doing lots of intelligent things by itself .. I can as an example already given walk to the fridge for a beer and not have an internal chat about it . Just because you don't chat about it doesn't mean anything other than that for there is still the thought and the awareness of what you are doing . You seem to equate not chatting about it meaning you see everything as 'it is' .. which is still a thought of what it is .. It's not like you walk to the fridge while not chatting about it constitutes not remembering or being conscious of walking to the fridge and the intelligent mind-body walked there for you and grabbed a beer for you .. You have given examples where there has not been any conscious thought about driving and such likes and this is different from what you are now saying . You are conscious of perceiving the fridge while not chatting .. If one is conscious, there is a thought . I know we see differently about 'thought' and that's totally cool but I have given reasons why and given dozens of examples to no avail .. I have even asked peeps to the the I AM aware experiment because it is impossible to separate I AM aware with a thought of that in this reality of mind, I mean you asked me to address the issues and explain myself and yet you didn't even respond to it lol . In regards to my realization, I have spoken about it every time I have been asked about it lol, In fact I have said that in essence it isn't even a realization because simply being what you are isn't anything other than that . Realization comes into play the moment you are back in self awareness or I am awareness of the mind and then you know that there is beyond the thought of what you are .. Everything is what you are .. I think I have made myself pretty clear in this respect . These I would say are very basic concepts one understands from the comparison had and this is something Sifting couldn't understand and therefore disregarded because it makes no logical sense at all.. When you have the comparison of no world, no self, no mind, you know what self and the world and the mind constitutes as well as words and concepts allow. I mentioned Bernadette Roberts several times because she said that to know 'no self' is to know self, and I toadally agreed with her on that . It's exactly what I am saying . This is why when a peep runs around saying I have lost self, they haven't in my eyes, when peeps think that they can walk to the fridge and pull a cold one out instead of a warm one, they are not operating and functioning beyond thought . There are so many instances that one can relate to in these ways and I thought that what I point out at times on these forums is proof enough of this .. Pretty much every concept derives through these comparions had because there is either self / perception / thought / awareness or there isn't . .. |
|
|
|
Post by roydop on Dec 10, 2019 8:52:30 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 . Sorry bud, but everyone else on the planet regards the voice in their head as "thought" and stuff they feel "sensations". While it is true that thoughts and sensations both arise from the same unchanging Source, a distinction is made between what's "inside" the skull and what's "outside" of it. The interior realm of thoughts is different than the exterior realm of sensations. One has the ability to "tune out" thought whereas it's almost impossible to tune out the exterior world to the point where it no longer arises. It is far easier to quell the thought process before it manifests into a "world"; at least for now. Soon enough the thought realm will take the place of the sense realm in that it will be the accepted reality. At that point thought will be as pervasive as sensations. At this period in evolution it is IMPERATIVE to transcend thought. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 10, 2019 8:59:34 GMT -5
Based on what tenka wrote to me in his last two posts, I'm translating his writing "spirit" into what I mean by "self-evidence". It's what I try to get at by asking .. "do you exist?"  For the purposes of that dialog I also translated his use of "spirit" (at least in those last two posts) into simply, "life". The wikipedia definition will be suffice .. spirit is the vital principle or animating force within all living things .. You see when the spirit leaves the body permanently the body perishes doesn't it . And when the spirit that is of the spirit body leaves the physical mind body the physical body doesn't walk to the fridge for beer, no matter how intelligent the body cell construct by design is . So I have been addressing the issue of transcending mind while the spirit / spirit-body is out of the physical body .. It also another good reason to bash consciousness over the head here in a way where consciousness is used a foundational word for what everything is because we have to involve these other aspects, like the spirit, like awareness and what being conscious means and refers too . There is a difference between the spirit that is of the physical mindful experience and the etheric / astral plane mindful experience . When the Pilgrim starts talking about concepts involving the physical brain aspects, it has no bearing on the more etheric experience of thought and yet it is all mind . What perhaps some peeps don't realize is that there can be S.R. from both sides of the veil, but this side of the veil has different aspects to it because we are of the physical world experience and the spirit is infused with the body .. In a nutshell, you can't be experiencing physicality and transcend mind while going for a walk perceiving the world at large and I have been trying to explain this in many different ways . (still not being understood tho) Ultimately, the distinction between life, and inanimate objects, is completely mind-made. It's not that the distinction isn't of practical value, or that it doesn't refer to something obviously observable in common experience - it most clearly does. It's just that in terms of the existential truth, it can either be a point of open, not-knowing and contemplation/meditation, or, it might be the subconscious core of a trick of the mind. A trick that obscures that existential truth. The same is true of the distinction between body and mind, between the physical and the etheric/astral planes. |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Dec 10, 2019 9:01:40 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 . Sorry bud, but everyone else on the planet regards the voice in their head as "thought" and stuff they feel "sensations". While it is true that thoughts and sensations both arise from the same unchanging Source, a distinction is made between what's "inside" the skull and what's "outside" of it. The interior realm of thoughts is different than the exterior realm of sensations. One has the ability to "tune out" thought whereas it's almost impossible to tune out the exterior world to the point where it no longer arises. It is far easier to quell the thought process before it manifests into a "world"; at least for now. Soon enough the thought realm will take the place of the sense realm in that it will be the accepted reality. At that point thought will be as pervasive as sensations. At this period in evolution it is IMPERATIVE to transcend thought. Just do the experiment .. locate the awareness of I AM .. then try and separate the thought of I am from the awareness of I AM of this world . I concur peeps can see my thoughts on thought differently, I wouldn't go as far as much to say that everyone else on the planet disagrees with me tho . Your thoughts on what constitutes inside and outside of the skull is purely from one perspective, what about those peeps that are formless and have no skulls, how are they capable of entertaining a thought? I will tell you, it is because it's all mind and it's all thought based . The base and the foundation of mind allows one to be aware of I AM and like said, try being aware of I AM without the thought that I AM . |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Dec 10, 2019 9:19:53 GMT -5
The wikipedia definition will be suffice .. spirit is the vital principle or animating force within all living things .. You see when the spirit leaves the body permanently the body perishes doesn't it . And when the spirit that is of the spirit body leaves the physical mind body the physical body doesn't walk to the fridge for beer, no matter how intelligent the body cell construct by design is . So I have been addressing the issue of transcending mind while the spirit / spirit-body is out of the physical body .. It also another good reason to bash consciousness over the head here in a way where consciousness is used a foundational word for what everything is because we have to involve these other aspects, like the spirit, like awareness and what being conscious means and refers too . There is a difference between the spirit that is of the physical mindful experience and the etheric / astral plane mindful experience . When the Pilgrim starts talking about concepts involving the physical brain aspects, it has no bearing on the more etheric experience of thought and yet it is all mind . What perhaps some peeps don't realize is that there can be S.R. from both sides of the veil, but this side of the veil has different aspects to it because we are of the physical world experience and the spirit is infused with the body .. In a nutshell, you can't be experiencing physicality and transcend mind while going for a walk perceiving the world at large and I have been trying to explain this in many different ways . (still not being understood tho) Ultimately, the distinction between life, and inanimate objects, is completely mind-made. It's not that the distinction isn't of practical value, or that it doesn't refer to something obviously observable in common experience - it most clearly does. It's just that in terms of the existential truth, it can either be a point of open, not-knowing and contemplation/meditation, or, it might be the subconscious core of a trick of the mind. A trick that obscures that existential truth. The same is true of the distinction between body and mind, between the physical and the etheric/astral planes. I think we live and learn and there are somethings that are conceptual that don't add or make sense where as the sun is hot makes more sense than the sun is like a pencil . What could potentially be mind-tricks could and could not be at the same time .. What makes sense to me is a theory that works but alas not all theories make sense to all and that's okay .. I explain myself as best I can based upon some core knowings I have, could all that be b.s., maybe it could if there were more comparison had eventually .. I think that if we live by a certain foundation then things seem to unfold in ways where things are not seen to be quite right and when that happens it's best to take notice of that .. It still could be b.s. but as said one won't know until the comparison is there . |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 10, 2019 9:41:24 GMT -5
Sorry bud, but everyone else on the planet regards the voice in their head as "thought" and stuff they feel "sensations". While it is true that thoughts and sensations both arise from the same unchanging Source, a distinction is made between what's "inside" the skull and what's "outside" of it. The interior realm of thoughts is different than the exterior realm of sensations. One has the ability to "tune out" thought whereas it's almost impossible to tune out the exterior world to the point where it no longer arises. It is far easier to quell the thought process before it manifests into a "world"; at least for now. Soon enough the thought realm will take the place of the sense realm in that it will be the accepted reality. At that point thought will be as pervasive as sensations. At this period in evolution it is IMPERATIVE to transcend thought. Just do the experiment .. locate the awareness of I AM .. then try and separate the thought of I am from the awareness of I AM of this world . I concur peeps can see my thoughts on thought differently, I wouldn't go as far as much to say that everyone else on the planet disagrees with me tho . Your thoughts on what constitutes inside and outside of the skull is purely from one perspective, what about those peeps that are formless and have no skulls, how are they capable of entertaining a thought?I will tell you, it is because it's all mind and it's all thought based . The base and the foundation of mind allows one to be aware of I AM and like said, try being aware of I AM without the thought that I AM . They use you to do it in.  |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 10, 2019 9:46:57 GMT -5
Just do the experiment .. locate the awareness of I AM .. then try and separate the thought of I am from the awareness of I AM of this world . I concur peeps can see my thoughts on thought differently, I wouldn't go as far as much to say that everyone else on the planet disagrees with me tho . Your thoughts on what constitutes inside and outside of the skull is purely from one perspective, what about those peeps that are formless and have no skulls, how are they capable of entertaining a thought?I will tell you, it is because it's all mind and it's all thought based . The base and the foundation of mind allows one to be aware of I AM and like said, try being aware of I AM without the thought that I AM . They use you to do it in.  |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 10, 2019 9:48:53 GMT -5
Ultimately, the distinction between life, and inanimate objects, is completely mind-made. It's not that the distinction isn't of practical value, or that it doesn't refer to something obviously observable in common experience - it most clearly does. It's just that in terms of the existential truth, it can either be a point of open, not-knowing and contemplation/meditation, or, it might be the subconscious core of a trick of the mind. A trick that obscures that existential truth. The same is true of the distinction between body and mind, between the physical and the etheric/astral planes. I think we live and learn and there are somethings that are conceptual that don't add or make sense where as the sun is hot makes more sense than the sun is like a pencil . What could potentially be mind-tricks could and could not be at the same time .. What makes sense to me is a theory that works but alas not all theories make sense to all and that's okay .. I explain myself as best I can based upon some core knowings I have, could all that be b.s., maybe it could if there were more comparison had eventually .. I think that if we live by a certain foundation then things seem to unfold in ways where things are not seen to be quite right and when that happens it's best to take notice of that .. It still could be b.s. but as said one won't know until the comparison is there . No theory can explain the limitless that is you, and ultimately, any and all theories will obscure that. |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Dec 10, 2019 10:01:25 GMT -5
I think we live and learn and there are somethings that are conceptual that don't add or make sense where as the sun is hot makes more sense than the sun is like a pencil . What could potentially be mind-tricks could and could not be at the same time .. What makes sense to me is a theory that works but alas not all theories make sense to all and that's okay .. I explain myself as best I can based upon some core knowings I have, could all that be b.s., maybe it could if there were more comparison had eventually .. I think that if we live by a certain foundation then things seem to unfold in ways where things are not seen to be quite right and when that happens it's best to take notice of that .. It still could be b.s. but as said one won't know until the comparison is there . No theory can explain the limitless that is you, and ultimately, any and all theories will obscure that. Even the theory that .. 'No theory can explain the limitless that is you' . This is on the same vibe as the theory of there being Truth, can there be any Truth to such a theory when what is pointed to is beyond theory? Just mind games really isn't it when there is one theory that is mean't to be more Truthy than another .. if there is potentially a Truthful theory that suggests any theory could just be a trick of the mind could equally be a trick of the mind or that any theory would obscure that Truth then there really is no Truthful foundation at all to one's reality .. I am more swayed as peeps know to believe in a foundation of some credibility rather than not, but like said if realizations turn out to be a trick of the mind then there is no hope for any of us no matter what we think we have realized or not .. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 10, 2019 10:04:25 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 . Sorry bud, but everyone else on the planet regards the voice in their head as "thought" and stuff they feel "sensations". While it is true that thoughts and sensations both arise from the same unchanging Source, a distinction is made between what's "inside" the skull and what's "outside" of it. The interior realm of thoughts is different than the exterior realm of sensations. One has the ability to "tune out" thought whereas it's almost impossible to tune out the exterior world to the point where it no longer arises. It is far easier to quell the thought process before it manifests into a "world"; at least for now. Soon enough the thought realm will take the place of the sense realm in that it will be the accepted reality. At that point thought will be as pervasive as sensations. At this period in evolution it is IMPERATIVE to transcend thought. >>Soon enough the thought realm will take the place of the sense realm in that it will be the accepted reality.<< So first some kind of experience is arising in thoughts and then it manifest in the outer world? And you say you can stop even before it arises in outer world? |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 10, 2019 10:35:13 GMT -5
No theory can explain the limitless that is you, and ultimately, any and all theories will obscure that. Even the theory that .. 'No theory can explain the limitless that is you' . This is on the same vibe as the theory of there being Truth, can there be any Truth to such a theory when what is pointed to is beyond theory? Just mind games really isn't it when there is one theory that is mean't to be more Truthy than another .. if there is potentially a Truthful theory that suggests any theory could just be a trick of the mind could equally be a trick of the mind or that any theory would obscure that Truth then there really is no Truthful foundation at all to one's reality .. I am more swayed as peeps know to believe in a foundation of some credibility rather than not, but like said if realizations turn out to be a trick of the mind then there is no hope for any of us no matter what we think we have realized or not .. It's not a theory, and the "Truth" in question isn't one that can be apprehended by theory. It is the thinking, rational mind that decomposes either of these sentences: 'No theory can explain the limitlessness that is you', or ''any and all theories will obscure that', and concludes that either of them state a theory. Now, there's nothing that I can write that will prove this to you. In fact, in intellectual terms, my position is no-win. I'll admit that, waaaaay up front. |
|
|
|
Post by roydop on Dec 10, 2019 12:51:28 GMT -5
Sorry bud, but everyone else on the planet regards the voice in their head as "thought" and stuff they feel "sensations". While it is true that thoughts and sensations both arise from the same unchanging Source, a distinction is made between what's "inside" the skull and what's "outside" of it. The interior realm of thoughts is different than the exterior realm of sensations. One has the ability to "tune out" thought whereas it's almost impossible to tune out the exterior world to the point where it no longer arises. It is far easier to quell the thought process before it manifests into a "world"; at least for now. Soon enough the thought realm will take the place of the sense realm in that it will be the accepted reality. At that point thought will be as pervasive as sensations. At this period in evolution it is IMPERATIVE to transcend thought. >>Soon enough the thought realm will take the place of the sense realm in that it will be the accepted reality.<< So first some kind of experience is arising in thoughts and then it manifest in the outer world? And you say you can stop even before it arises in outer world? The system is: thought - action (manifestation in physical realm) - thought - action... on all time scales. The time scale i'm referring to is the BIG one. The BIG manifestation (the Big Bang) of the 4D physical realm is shifting back to the non-physical realm of thought. So the extinction event is perfectly in sync with the Technological Singularity (technology is all thought produced), which is quite the coincidence, don't you figure? The next manifestation for those who are addicted to the screen, will be on the inside of a computer/cyborg, taking Self to be a character in a computer simulation, identifying Self with the voice in your head, rather than a biological body. This is why i feel that if one simply takes care of the thought issue (transcendence of that voice in your head), the natural unfolding of the cycle will take care of the rest. The body is dropping away and "mind" is coming to the forefront. |
|
|
|
Post by roydop on Dec 10, 2019 12:53:56 GMT -5
Sorry bud, but everyone else on the planet regards the voice in their head as "thought" and stuff they feel "sensations". While it is true that thoughts and sensations both arise from the same unchanging Source, a distinction is made between what's "inside" the skull and what's "outside" of it. The interior realm of thoughts is different than the exterior realm of sensations. One has the ability to "tune out" thought whereas it's almost impossible to tune out the exterior world to the point where it no longer arises. It is far easier to quell the thought process before it manifests into a "world"; at least for now. Soon enough the thought realm will take the place of the sense realm in that it will be the accepted reality. At that point thought will be as pervasive as sensations. At this period in evolution it is IMPERATIVE to transcend thought. Just do the experiment .. locate the awareness of I AM .. then try and separate the thought of I am from the awareness of I AM of this world . I concur peeps can see my thoughts on thought differently, I wouldn't go as far as much to say that everyone else on the planet disagrees with me tho . Your thoughts on what constitutes inside and outside of the skull is purely from one perspective, what about those peeps that are formless and have no skulls, how are they capable of entertaining a thought? I will tell you, it is because it's all mind and it's all thought based . The base and the foundation of mind allows one to be aware of I AM and like said, try being aware of I AM without the thought that I AM . You are digging holes to fill them back in. Spirituality/Realization is a not-doing. It's a letting go. |
|
For the purposes of that dialog I also translated his use of "spirit" (at least in those last two posts) into simply, "life". 