|
|
Post by tenka on Aug 29, 2022 14:03:18 GMT -5
Yes . This is the nature of mindful thought . Thought isn't absent when there is self awareness of something perceived .
Even if the notion of I am is minimal there is a reflective minimal thought of oneself through awareness of that .
Various aspects of mindfulness doesn't change anything that is of the foundation of mind .
Climb up on top of the fence, look over. makes no sense to me that response . Perhaps you could explain yourself . |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Aug 29, 2022 14:04:48 GMT -5
I have said many times before . You guys speak as if thought means some sort of constant thinking when it doesn't . A babe doesn't need to think about the mechanics behind the scenes in order for it to breathe in order for it to breathe . A babe doesn't need to think about what things mean in the grand scheme of things in order to entertain a thought of itself in reflection of everything perceived . A babe as an example is flawed because the foundation is already in place for thought to be . When a babe reaches a point to understand the nature of self or the mind then it will understand but just because a babe hasn't reached that point it doesn't negate anything of what can be eventually understood . tenka, sorry, I don't have the time or inclination to try to unfold all of this. You precisely understand what we mean, you have explained it very clearly concerning a baby. So I actually don't know where everything goes off the rails, how you do not understand other people, and how they do not understand tenka. (Mostly the first, well, no, the second, the mind shuts down...) No worries, I had no answers the last time I made the effort to explain . Perhaps you need to look over the fence lol . It's so straightforward what I am saying . |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Aug 29, 2022 14:11:36 GMT -5
... and yet many have different takes on Consciousness, mind, self, Self, awakened, asleep, the dream etc . I have explained my premise in depth regarding why thought is mind based and peeps still can't prise apart being aware of something and having a thought of that something .
If a peep has the comparison for no self and no mind then it will be clear in what I am saying .You Kant be of the mind, being aware and yet not be entertaining thought .I am not bothered what dictionary definition peeps want to refer thought too, if you look it can vary across a wide spectrum of meaning . All you need to do is understand the nature of the mind and how thought plays it's part in or of it that reflects an awareness of self . Thought IS mind based, I don't think anyone here will disagree with that. So that problem is solved. The blue, is what everybody here is arguing against you, about. EVERYBODY understands "being aware of something" and "having a thought of that something", are two entirely different things. That problem is solved. So it seems you are shadow boxing tenka. But then we get this: Can't you see that this contradicts the first? Nothing contradicts anything . There is mind . There is self . There is perception . There is thought . Not sure what your problem is . You can't be perceiving the world and not entertain a thought of it in reflection of self . You haven't said how you can prise apart being aware of something and having a thought of that something . They are not two different things at all . In order to register what one is perceiving one has a data base within mind of what something is compared to not . You need to broaden your horizon of what mind constitutes in reflection of self awareness . Ramana spoke about the lighters flame in reflection of the world being present or not . In reflection of I am present or not . What you are in a way suggesting is that you can be aware of the lighters flame in reflection of self, and not have a thought of that . The mind is thought based which is what we agree on, so everything perceived within or the mind is thought based . Perception is thought based . Awareness of the world via a self reflection is thought based . I am not using a foreign language and there is no need for a translator . What is required is for there to be someone who understands what mind and self and thought constitutes compared to not . Then all will be clear . A translator will not help you in this regard . |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 29, 2022 14:58:37 GMT -5
Climb up on top of the fence, look over. makes no sense to me that response . Perhaps you could explain yourself . We all think our view is correct, obviously. But we are merely looking out of a window. I'm just saying, try to look at things from other points of view, on top of the fence you can see both sides. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 29, 2022 15:21:18 GMT -5
Thought IS mind based, I don't think anyone here will disagree with that. So that problem is solved. The blue, is what everybody here is arguing against you, about. EVERYBODY understands "being aware of something" and "having a thought of that something", are two entirely different things. That problem is solved. So it seems you are shadow boxing tenka. But then we get this: Can't you see that this contradicts the first? Nothing contradicts anything . There is mind . There is self . There is perception . There is thought . Not sure what your problem is . You can't be perceiving the world and not entertain a thought of it in reflection of self . You haven't said how you can prise apart being aware of something and having a thought of that something . They are not two different things at all . In order to register what one is perceiving one has a data base within mind of what something is compared to not . You need to broaden your horizon of what mind constitutes in reflection of self awareness . Ramana spoke about the lighters flame in reflection of the world being present or not . In reflection of I am present or not . What you are in a way suggesting is that you can be aware of the lighters flame in reflection of self, and not have a thought of that . The mind is thought based which is what we agree on, so everything perceived within or the mind is thought based . Perception is thought based . Awareness of the world via a self reflection is thought based . I am not using a foreign language and there is no need for a translator . What is required is for there to be someone who understands what mind and self and thought constitutes compared to not . Then all will be clear . A translator will not help you in this regard . Awareness can operate apart from thought (apart from abstract thinking). We can't know awareness apart from cognition, brain processing. If you are saying that, those, we have no problem. Perception is not based on abstract thinking. Perception is based on cognition, brain processing, between the exterior world and the brain-neural-structure via nerves. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ self is another matter. We can be aware, apart from self. self is actually a kind of restriction on awareness. self is a very very tiny window. self is a subset to mind. Mind is a subset to awareness. If you are saying something different form those, dialogue ends. self is a construct, formed from stored-perceptions, and meta-thoughts, thoughts about thoughts. Ramana's Self, supersedes awareness, mind-brain-processing-perception, and self. ND collapses all this to Self. |
|
|
|
Post by sree on Aug 29, 2022 16:46:08 GMT -5
Thought IS mind based, I don't think anyone here will disagree with that. So that problem is solved. The blue, is what everybody here is arguing against you, about. EVERYBODY understands "being aware of something" and "having a thought of that something", are two entirely different things. That problem is solved. So it seems you are shadow boxing tenka. But then we get this: Can't you see that this contradicts the first? Nothing contradicts anything . There is mind . There is self . There is perception . There is thought . Not sure what your problem is . You can't be perceiving the world and not entertain a thought of it in reflection of self . You haven't said how you can prise apart being aware of something and having a thought of that something . They are not two different things at all . In order to register what one is perceiving one has a data base within mind of what something is compared to not . You need to broaden your horizon of what mind constitutes in reflection of self awareness . Ramana spoke about the lighters flame in reflection of the world being present or not . In reflection of I am present or not . What you are in a way suggesting is that you can be aware of the lighters flame in reflection of self, and not have a thought of that . The mind is thought based which is what we agree on, so everything perceived within or the mind is thought based . Perception is thought based . Awareness of the world via a self reflection is thought based . I am not using a foreign language and there is no need for a translator . What is required is for there to be someone who understands what mind and self and thought constitutes compared to not . Then all will be clear . A translator will not help you in this regard . Does a dog understand anything? And yet, it is able to conduct itself as a perfect dog. What is wrong with peeps who have to figure out mind and self and thought and still can't behave like sane human beings? |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Sept 2, 2022 14:17:04 GMT -5
makes no sense to me that response . Perhaps you could explain yourself . We all think our view is correct, obviously. But we are merely looking out of a window. I'm just saying, try to look at things from other points of view, on top of the fence you can see both sides. Sure you can look from both sides of the fence butt you have to be neutral so to speak . In regards to what I understand I can't agree to believe in what I don't . I can see lots of points of view but at the end of the day, what is realised out trumps anything else . It has to, otherwise what is realised means nowt . |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Sept 2, 2022 14:20:26 GMT -5
Nothing contradicts anything . There is mind . There is self . There is perception . There is thought . Not sure what your problem is . You can't be perceiving the world and not entertain a thought of it in reflection of self . You haven't said how you can prise apart being aware of something and having a thought of that something . They are not two different things at all . In order to register what one is perceiving one has a data base within mind of what something is compared to not . You need to broaden your horizon of what mind constitutes in reflection of self awareness . Ramana spoke about the lighters flame in reflection of the world being present or not . In reflection of I am present or not . What you are in a way suggesting is that you can be aware of the lighters flame in reflection of self, and not have a thought of that . The mind is thought based which is what we agree on, so everything perceived within or the mind is thought based . Perception is thought based . Awareness of the world via a self reflection is thought based . I am not using a foreign language and there is no need for a translator . What is required is for there to be someone who understands what mind and self and thought constitutes compared to not . Then all will be clear . A translator will not help you in this regard . Awareness can operate apart from thought (apart from abstract thinking). We can't know awareness apart from cognition, brain processing. If you are saying that, those, we have no problem. .. we are talking about perceiving the world . If you are perceiving the world, then there is a thought of it . The world is mind based . The mind is thought based . I can't put it any simpler . |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Sept 2, 2022 14:26:31 GMT -5
Nothing contradicts anything . There is mind . There is self . There is perception . There is thought . Not sure what your problem is . You can't be perceiving the world and not entertain a thought of it in reflection of self . You haven't said how you can prise apart being aware of something and having a thought of that something . They are not two different things at all . In order to register what one is perceiving one has a data base within mind of what something is compared to not . You need to broaden your horizon of what mind constitutes in reflection of self awareness . Ramana spoke about the lighters flame in reflection of the world being present or not . In reflection of I am present or not . What you are in a way suggesting is that you can be aware of the lighters flame in reflection of self, and not have a thought of that . The mind is thought based which is what we agree on, so everything perceived within or the mind is thought based . Perception is thought based . Awareness of the world via a self reflection is thought based . I am not using a foreign language and there is no need for a translator . What is required is for there to be someone who understands what mind and self and thought constitutes compared to not . Then all will be clear . A translator will not help you in this regard . Does a dog understand anything? And yet, it is able to conduct itself as a perfect dog. What is wrong with peeps who have to figure out mind and self and thought and still can't behave like sane human beings? Human beings can evolve up to a point where there is Self realisation and what results in that is the understanding of many things . Comparing dogs going about a dogs life compared to something else in a way where it negates the human realisation doesn't make sense to me . Why not speak about a goldfish just blowing bubbles underwater, or some kind of amoeba cell just doing what an amoeba cell does without a care in the world lol . |
|
|
|
Post by sree on Sept 2, 2022 19:03:11 GMT -5
Does a dog understand anything? And yet, it is able to conduct itself as a perfect dog. What is wrong with peeps who have to figure out mind and self and thought and still can't behave like sane human beings? Comparing dogs going about a dogs life compared to something else in a way where it negates the human realisation doesn't make sense to me . Why not speak about a goldfish just blowing bubbles underwater, or some kind of amoeba cell just doing what an amoeba cell does without a care in the world lol . Evolution theory. You follow the science then, to wherever it may leads? This is a spiritual forum. Peeps here are also into science? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2022 22:08:23 GMT -5
Awareness can operate apart from thought (apart from abstract thinking). We can't know awareness apart from cognition, brain processing. If you are saying that, those, we have no problem. .. we are talking about perceiving the world . If you are perceiving the world, then there is a thought of it . The world is mind based . The mind is thought based . I can't put it any simpler . yeah but you didn't answer his question about when awareness is devoid of thought and perception and world. And another thing I just looked out of the window and saw a tree but I didn't have the thought tree in my mind. I just perceived it. Are you telling me that it's necessary to put a label on every single object you see from moment to moment. Surely that would be overwhelming. |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Sept 3, 2022 6:19:17 GMT -5
Human beings can evolve up to a point where there is Self realisation and what results in that is the understanding of many things .Comparing dogs going about a dogs life compared to something else in a way where it negates the human realisation doesn't make sense to me . Why not speak about a goldfish just blowing bubbles underwater, or some kind of amoeba cell just doing what an amoeba cell does without a care in the world lol . Evolution theory. You follow the science then, to wherever it may leads? This is a spiritual forum. Peeps here are also into science? I think it's self evident that there are different levels of self awareness depending on what one is in experience of . This is true enough to say in regards to the same species but by design there are limitations based upon such design . The capacity to Self realise by design is not for all species . The capacity to understand the nature of all appearances equally isn't . |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Sept 3, 2022 6:22:03 GMT -5
.. we are talking about perceiving the world . If you are perceiving the world, then there is a thought of it . The world is mind based . The mind is thought based . I can't put it any simpler . yeah but you didn't answer his question about when awareness is devoid of thought and perception and world. And another thing I just looked out of the window and saw a tree but I didn't have the thought tree in my mind. I just perceived it. Are you telling me that it's necessary to put a label on every single object you see from moment to moment. Surely that would be overwhelming. This is why I said 'we are talking about perceiving the world' we are not talking about awareness devoid of that and what that means in relation to thought and mind and perception . |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Sept 3, 2022 6:27:14 GMT -5
.. we are talking about perceiving the world . If you are perceiving the world, then there is a thought of it . The world is mind based . The mind is thought based . I can't put it any simpler . yeah but you didn't answer his question about when awareness is devoid of thought and perception and world. And another thing I just looked out of the window and saw a tree but I didn't have the thought tree in my mind. I just perceived it. Are you telling me that it's necessary to put a label on every single object you see from moment to moment. Surely that would be overwhelming.There is no need to put a label on everything, but one knows the difference between perceiving something rather than not . Any self evident recognition of perceiving something compared to not is based upon mindfulness . Mind is thought based, they go hand in hand .. this is why I say also you can't prise apart awareness of self and a thought of self where mind is concerned . So where there is perception there is mindfulness, there is self awareness, there is a thought of oneself in reflection of what is perceived, no matter what one thinks or not about whatever that may be or not . |
|
|
|
Post by sree on Sept 3, 2022 10:34:52 GMT -5
Evolution theory. You follow the science then, to wherever it may leads? This is a spiritual forum. Peeps here are also into science? I think it's self evident that there are different levels of self awareness depending on what one is in experience of . This is true enough to say in regards to the same species but by design there are limitations based upon such design . The capacity to Self realise by design is not for all species . The capacity to understand the nature of all appearances equally isn't . You seem to imply that the human species is better off on account of the capacity to "Self realize". Other species don't commit suicide. |
|
