|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Oct 29, 2022 9:46:50 GMT -5
I had read it as taking off a layer (i.e., of possession/duality) and expressing Isness in an ever-so-slightly (and cleverly) different variation. I think you might mean what 'bouros had to say about ATA-T and "Love/love"?  How to describe the instant of THIS! ..  Passion's hurricane halted in the sublime, eye Sometime in this past year it dawned on me that re-heating coffee with the milk in it allows for a much hotter cup (because I like alot of milk) vs luke warm if you add it later. So I've come to understand why they make cappuccino machines .. but I'll never buy one 'cause I actually like the slimey little film that forms .. but that's not the point of this rambling mini-anecdote.  I use a saucepan - because the point is you don't want to reheat the whole pot unnecessarily, nor do you want to add milk to a peculator ..  .. So's anyways, for awhile I was measuring out the cups in the saucepan. Eventually though, I just stopped doing the measurement because it's too much of a pain in the ass, just poured in some coffee, then added some milk. Several months ago, I noticed - without looking for this - that I always get exactly one full cup out of the saucepan. ..  .. Now, I know that the machinists can explain this in terms of sub-conscious learning and "blah blah blah", but dude.  It's kinda' creepy. please send help! oh, that's just perfect!  bumbling into accidental zen  Dang, just lost a longer reply to this somehow. I'll summarize. I'm guilty of not reading back further into what Ouro was on about. I had just read the post as a poem and gleaned some intention. That said, I do sense what you, perhaps, were trying to peel back and share a peek. As for the saucepan coffee anecdote, it IS interesting to see how mastery just bubbles up like that. It kinda reminded me of some "chai baba" days when I was recognized as making some of the best masala milk chai in the valley. One thing I did notice in my endeavor to produce ever-better chais was how the milk was treated. Did you ever notice that you might also LIKE the taste of the saucepan variation on heating the milk coffee, rather than just adding it? If interested, you might look into the Malliard Reaction in milk using various heat treatments, of which pasteurization is but one. Back then, I didn't know anything about it, but it was interesting to see the chemistry reactions' effects on taste/preference. The reason I'm on and on about it here is because I had never thought of simply using a saucepan to get the same effect for my coffee, and I'm gonna be taking your lead from now on! 🙏🏽🔥☕ |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Oct 29, 2022 14:27:54 GMT -5
tenka said: Thought is a tricky one on these forums because there isn't much scope beyond the mental chatter it refers too, but if you can't separate thought from awareness, then you can't be aware of the love for the wifey or the dog without entertaining the thought of them . sree said: I am trying to keep the conversation free of forum word salads. No one understands another when forum word salads are used. They are like a jargon intelligible only to members within an esoteric circle. Academic philosophers use jargon intelligible to every member within their intellectual community. In this forum, however, peeps use a jargon that is intelligible only to the user. To other peeps, it is an unintelligible word salad. Strange language.
I don't think thought is tricky. It is the thinkers in this forum who are tricky.
Sure, I understand non duality word salads enough so, that it keeps conversations going round and round forevermore . Butt in regards to awareness, that's self evident innit . You can't be loving someone/thing without being aware of that someone/thing. You Kant be loving that someone/thing without entertaining a thought of them . Not really much of a word said .. more something that is obvious and self evident . Me likes that kinda common sense talk . |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Oct 29, 2022 14:38:48 GMT -5
It's why I posed the question, what would ones relationship be with their partner in a state like ATA-T. Is it love, or can it only be Love. That said, I don't think it's too much of an issue to distinguish thought from awareness. You can have awareness without thought, which is NS. in fact it's prior to sensory perception. You can even talk about subconscious mental processing as prior to thought which along with the substratum of awareness allows for pre-thought tree-thwacking, as well as perhaps flow etc. Which would include some measure of interaction with your partner. So all that's with sensory perception. Although I gather all this is where it gets murky for you, i.e. you perhaps don't like to distinguish subconscious mental processing from thought. Relationships though. That's where it gets interesting for me, and I refer back to the first line … Butt, that doesn't relate to the question referring to loving your wife .... because having the awareness and the thought about the love for your wife isn't prior to sensory perception .. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Oct 30, 2022 0:46:35 GMT -5
I think you might mean what 'bouros had to say about ATA-T and "Love/love"? How to describe the instant of THIS! .. Passion's hurricane halted in the sublime, eye Sometime in this past year it dawned on me that re-heating coffee with the milk in it allows for a much hotter cup (because I like alot of milk) vs luke warm if you add it later. So I've come to understand why they make cappuccino machines .. but I'll never buy one 'cause I actually like the slimey little film that forms .. but that's not the point of this rambling mini-anecdote. I use a saucepan - because the point is you don't want to reheat the whole pot unnecessarily, nor do you want to add milk to a peculator .. .. So's anyways, for awhile I was measuring out the cups in the saucepan. Eventually though, I just stopped doing the measurement because it's too much of a pain in the ass, just poured in some coffee, then added some milk. Several months ago, I noticed - without looking for this - that I always get exactly one full cup out of the saucepan. .. .. Now, I know that the machinists can explain this in terms of sub-conscious learning and "blah blah blah", but dude. It's kinda' creepy. please send help! oh, that's just perfect! bumbling into accidental zen Dang, just lost a longer reply to this somehow. I'll summarize. I'm guilty of not reading back further into what Ouro was on about. I had just read the post as a poem and gleaned some intention. That said, I do sense what you, perhaps, were trying to peel back and share a peek. As for the saucepan coffee anecdote, it IS interesting to see how mastery just bubbles up like that. It kinda reminded me of some "chai baba" days when I was recognized as making some of the best masala milk chai in the valley. One thing I did notice in my endeavor to produce ever-better chais was how the milk was treated. Did you ever notice that you might also LIKE the taste of the saucepan variation on heating the milk coffee, rather than just adding it? If interested, you might look into the Malliard Reaction in milk using various heat treatments, of which pasteurization is but one. Back then, I didn't know anything about it, but it was interesting to see the chemistry reactions' effects on taste/preference. The reason I'm on and on about it here is because I had never thought of simply using a saucepan to get the same effect for my coffee, and I'm gonna be taking your lead from now on! 🙏🏽🔥☕ Yes, now that you mention it, it's like a salty ummami that accents the taste of the bean, and so it takes some of the mask off by allowing back in some of the bitterness. Be forewarned of a sticky film on the pot and the cup. |
|
|
|
Post by ouroboros on Oct 30, 2022 7:57:30 GMT -5
It's why I posed the question, what would ones relationship be with their partner in a state like ATA-T. Is it love, or can it only be Love. That said, I don't think it's too much of an issue to distinguish thought from awareness. You can have awareness without thought, which is NS. in fact it's prior to sensory perception. You can even talk about subconscious mental processing as prior to thought which along with the substratum of awareness allows for pre-thought tree-thwacking, as well as perhaps flow etc. Which would include some measure of interaction with your partner. So all that's with sensory perception. Although I gather all this is where it gets murky for you, i.e. you perhaps don't like to distinguish subconscious mental processing from thought. Relationships though. That's where it gets interesting for me, and I refer back to the first line … Butt, that doesn't relate to the question referring to loving your wife .... because having the awareness and the thought about the love for your wife isn't prior to sensory perception .. It wasn't really meant to specifically relate to that. It was just to say that you can in fact 'separate' thought from awareness, as you'd stated the contrary in the post I was replying to. It's best to start on the right foot. It was in my following paragraph to the one you've bolded that I go onto talk about the situation in a sensory perceptive state (such as ATA-T), and I've actually been making the argument that love for your partner is questionable, because love necessitates thought. Although the awareness of your partner isn't really, because at least some measure of 'being aware of them' is covered by making a distinction between [the necessary] subconscious mental processing … and thought. It's that last distinction that is the grey area. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Oct 30, 2022 10:35:57 GMT -5
Butt, that doesn't relate to the question referring to loving your wife .... because having the awareness and the thought about the love for your wife isn't prior to sensory perception .. It wasn't really meant to specifically relate to that. It was just to say that you can in fact 'separate' thought from awareness, as you'd stated the contrary in the post I was replying to. It's best to start on the right foot. It was in my following paragraph to the one you've bolded that I go onto talk about the situation in a sensory perceptive state (such as ATA-T), and I've actually been making the argument that love for your partner is questionable, because love necessitates thought. Although the awareness of your partner isn't really, because at least some measure of 'being aware of them' is covered by making a distinction between [the necessary] subconscious mental processing … and thought. It's that last distinction that is the grey area. Tenka has told us in the past that he does not distinguish between subconscious mental processing, conscious mind talk, or sensory perception. From his POV awareness and thought are synonymous. Whether he has ever been in the state of NS, in which there is pure awareness but no consciousness of thoughts, perceptions, time, space, or a body is unclear. |
|
|
|
Post by ouroboros on Oct 30, 2022 14:49:57 GMT -5
It wasn't really meant to specifically relate to that. It was just to say that you can in fact 'separate' thought from awareness, as you'd stated the contrary in the post I was replying to. It's best to start on the right foot. It was in my following paragraph to the one you've bolded that I go onto talk about the situation in a sensory perceptive state (such as ATA-T), and I've actually been making the argument that love for your partner is questionable, because love necessitates thought. Although the awareness of your partner isn't really, because at least some measure of 'being aware of them' is covered by making a distinction between [the necessary] subconscious mental processing … and thought. It's that last distinction that is the grey area. Tenka has told us in the past that he does not distinguish between subconscious mental processing, conscious mind talk, or sensory perception. From his POV awareness and thought are synonymous. Whether he has ever been in the state of NS, in which there is pure awareness but no consciousness of thoughts, perceptions, time, space, or a body is unclear. Fwiw. I don't believe Tenka does have a reference for either NS or ATA-T. Both being relatively rare. But if he did, he wouldn't be taking the positions he takes and lumping all those things in together. I note that as a result he tends only to be able talk in terms of 'awareness of …' Which puts his version of awareness squarely and inescapably in the category of cognition. As far as I can tell neither Tenka nor most others can conceive of any form of awareness either prior to, or different from that. If so NS is out the window for starters, even as a theory. But also. In ATA-T, for example, there is awareness (being the substratum), but I'm pretty confident neither you or I would be inclined to talk in terms of 'awareness of …' with regard to that state. In ATA-T there is awareness, and there is subconscious mental processing/sensory perception. But there is not conscious mind talk (thought). Therefore, the 'aware-sense perception' in ATA-T isn't 'awareness of', as such. It's more direct and immediate than that, and we need to appreciate that you really would have to have direct reference for the state in order to be able to relate to that.. Imagine for a moment that you literally could only conceive of awareness as 'awareness of …' and that anything other than that is complete anathema. As imperceptible as those conquistador ships on the horizon were said to be for the Incas. Pretty sure that's what we're up against here. For me subconscious mental processing and sensory perception tend to go in tandem in any state over and above NS. Where it gets interesting is between subconscious mental processing (SMP) and conscious mind talk (CMT), aka thought. Essentially we're talking about different 'levels' of cognition, and what is requisite for any given experience. This is what I've described as the grey area and have said that it's hard to pinpoint where one transitions into the other, where SMP transitions into CMT. Along with the spontaneous into the habitual. Anyway, I don't think I'm going to get to explore the interesting part with them if even the awareness part is apples and oranges. |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Oct 30, 2022 15:10:19 GMT -5
Butt, that doesn't relate to the question referring to loving your wife .... because having the awareness and the thought about the love for your wife isn't prior to sensory perception .. It was just to say that you can in fact 'separate' thought from awareness, as you'd stated the contrary in the post I was replying to. It's best to start on the right foot. It was in my following paragraph to the one you've bolded that I go onto talk about the situation in a sensory perceptive state (such as ATA-T), and I've actually been making the argument that love for your partner is questionable, because love necessitates thought. Although the awareness of your partner isn't really, because at least some measure of 'being aware of them' is covered by making a distinction between [the necessary] subconscious mental processing … and thought. It's that last distinction that is the grey area. That's okay mate, but I was being specific in relation to that . I would agree that that one can separate a thought from awareness to a degree that there was no awareness of something self related of the mind, butt you just can't when there are relations to something mindful . This was my beef about peeps washing the dishes without a thought of it some time back .. Peeps doing things absent of thought . That's why you can't prise apart awareness from thought in these instances because one has to register what one is doing prior too, during and after the event . |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Oct 30, 2022 15:12:36 GMT -5
Tenka has told us in the past that he does not distinguish between subconscious mental processing, conscious mind talk, or sensory perception. From his POV awareness and thought are synonymous. Whether he has ever been in the state of NS, in which there is pure awareness but no consciousness of thoughts, perceptions, time, space, or a body is unclear. But if he did, he wouldn't be taking the positions he takes and lumping all those things in together. I note that as a result he tends only to be able talk in terms of 'awareness of …' Which puts his version of awareness squarely and inescapably in the category of cognition. As far as I can tell neither Tenka nor most others can conceive of any form of awareness either prior to, or different from that. If so NS is out the window for starters, even as a theory. But also. In ATA-T, for example, there is awareness (being the substratum), but I'm pretty confident neither you or I would be inclined to talk in terms of 'awareness of …' with regard to that state. In ATA-T there is awareness, and there is subconscious mental processing/sensory perception. But there is not conscious mind talk (thought). Therefore, the 'aware-sense perception' in ATA-T isn't 'awareness of', as such. It's more direct and immediate than that, and we need to appreciate that you really would have to have direct reference for the state in order to be able to relate to that.. Imagine for a moment that you literally could only conceive of awareness as 'awareness of …' and that anything other than that is complete anathema. As imperceptible as those conquistador ships on the horizon were said to be for the Incas. Pretty sure that's what we're up against here. For me subconscious mental processing and sensory perception tend to go in tandem in any state over and above NS. Where it gets interesting is between subconscious mental processing (SMP) and conscious mind talk (CMT), aka thought. Essentially we're talking about different 'levels' of cognition, and what is requisite for any given experience. This is what I've described as the grey area and have said that it's hard to pinpoint where one transitions into the other, where SMP transitions into CMT. Along with the spontaneous into the habitual. Anyway, I don't think I'm going to get to explore the interesting part with them if even the awareness part is apples and oranges. Actually I do have the comparison under my locker regarding self and no self. Awareness of the mind and beyond . That's why I say what I say . |
|
|
|
Post by ouroboros on Oct 30, 2022 16:00:52 GMT -5
It wasn't really meant to specifically relate to that. It was just to say that you can in fact 'separate' thought from awareness, as you'd stated the contrary in the post I was replying to. It's best to start on the right foot. It was in my following paragraph to the one you've bolded that I go onto talk about the situation in a sensory perceptive state (such as ATA-T), and I've actually been making the argument that love for your partner is questionable, because love necessitates thought. Although the awareness of your partner isn't really, because at least some measure of 'being aware of them' is covered by making a distinction between [the necessary] subconscious mental processing … and thought. It's that last distinction that is the grey area. That's okay mate, but I was being specific in relation to that . I would agree that that one can separate a thought from awareness to a degree that there was no awareness of something self related of the mind, butt you just can't when there are relations to something mindful . This was my beef about peeps washing the dishes without a thought of it some time back .. Peeps doing things absent of thought . That's why you can't prise apart awareness from thought in these instances because one has to register what one is doing prior too, during and after the event . Tenka, I have an exploratory question for you. I'm led to consider how the very young baby develops a preference for its mothers face. It seems to me that awareness, subconscious mental processing and sensory perception are all in play, yet not conscious mind talk (thought). So, some sort of preference/attachment is formed, but as part of a pre-thought 'ATA-T like' process. What are your thoughts about that, is it feasible? |
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Oct 30, 2022 17:42:42 GMT -5
Dang, just lost a longer reply to this somehow. I'll summarize. I'm guilty of not reading back further into what Ouro was on about. I had just read the post as a poem and gleaned some intention. That said, I do sense what you, perhaps, were trying to peel back and share a peek. As for the saucepan coffee anecdote, it IS interesting to see how mastery just bubbles up like that. It kinda reminded me of some "chai baba" days when I was recognized as making some of the best masala milk chai in the valley. One thing I did notice in my endeavor to produce ever-better chais was how the milk was treated. Did you ever notice that you might also LIKE the taste of the saucepan variation on heating the milk coffee, rather than just adding it? If interested, you might look into the Malliard Reaction in milk using various heat treatments, of which pasteurization is but one. Back then, I didn't know anything about it, but it was interesting to see the chemistry reactions' effects on taste/preference. The reason I'm on and on about it here is because I had never thought of simply using a saucepan to get the same effect for my coffee, and I'm gonna be taking your lead from now on! 🙏🏽🔥☕ Yes, now that you mention it, it's like a salty ummami that accents the taste of the bean, and so it takes some of the mask off by allowing back in some of the bitterness. Be forewarned of a sticky film on the pot and the cup. 🧐😛 |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Oct 31, 2022 10:21:34 GMT -5
Tenka has told us in the past that he does not distinguish between subconscious mental processing, conscious mind talk, or sensory perception. From his POV awareness and thought are synonymous. Whether he has ever been in the state of NS, in which there is pure awareness but no consciousness of thoughts, perceptions, time, space, or a body is unclear. Fwiw. I don't believe Tenka does have a reference for either NS or ATA-T. Both being relatively rare. But if he did, he wouldn't be taking the positions he takes and lumping all those things in together. I note that as a result he tends only to be able talk in terms of 'awareness of …' Which puts his version of awareness squarely and inescapably in the category of cognition. As far as I can tell neither Tenka nor most others can conceive of any form of awareness either prior to, or different from that. If so NS is out the window for starters, even as a theory. But also. In ATA-T, for example, there is awareness (being the substratum), but I'm pretty confident neither you or I would be inclined to talk in terms of 'awareness of …' with regard to that state. In ATA-T there is awareness, and there is subconscious mental processing/sensory perception. But there is not conscious mind talk (thought). Therefore, the 'aware-sense perception' in ATA-T isn't 'awareness of', as such. It's more direct and immediate than that, and we need to appreciate that you really would have to have direct reference for the state in order to be able to relate to that.. Imagine for a moment that you literally could only conceive of awareness as 'awareness of …' and that anything other than that is complete anathema. As imperceptible as those conquistador ships on the horizon were said to be for the Incas. Pretty sure that's what we're up against here. For me subconscious mental processing and sensory perception tend to go in tandem in any state over and above NS. Where it gets interesting is between subconscious mental processing (SMP) and conscious mind talk (CMT), aka thought. Essentially we're talking about different 'levels' of cognition, and what is requisite for any given experience. This is what I've described as the grey area and have said that it's hard to pinpoint where one transitions into the other, where SMP transitions into CMT. Along with the spontaneous into the habitual. Anyway, I don't think I'm going to get to explore the interesting part with them if even the awareness part is apples and oranges. As far as how I experience it, ATA-T is actually quite ordinary, and the only difference between now and even long before I read Tolle is that I have a conceptual notion of it and it sometimes even seems to happen deliberately (but, at this point, the notion of "attendance" well .. ha! ha! .. ..). I can't imagine someone absent reference for it - which doesn't mean it isn't possible, but I have to speculate to some degree. Rather, it seems to me that it actually frightens or at least discomforts some people when it happens, "bores" many others, and most people just simply aren't aware of the significance of it. |
|
|
|
Post by ouroboros on Oct 31, 2022 11:04:52 GMT -5
Fwiw. I don't believe Tenka does have a reference for either NS or ATA-T. Both being relatively rare. But if he did, he wouldn't be taking the positions he takes and lumping all those things in together. I note that as a result he tends only to be able talk in terms of 'awareness of …' Which puts his version of awareness squarely and inescapably in the category of cognition. As far as I can tell neither Tenka nor most others can conceive of any form of awareness either prior to, or different from that. If so NS is out the window for starters, even as a theory. But also. In ATA-T, for example, there is awareness (being the substratum), but I'm pretty confident neither you or I would be inclined to talk in terms of 'awareness of …' with regard to that state. In ATA-T there is awareness, and there is subconscious mental processing/sensory perception. But there is not conscious mind talk (thought). Therefore, the 'aware-sense perception' in ATA-T isn't 'awareness of', as such. It's more direct and immediate than that, and we need to appreciate that you really would have to have direct reference for the state in order to be able to relate to that.. Imagine for a moment that you literally could only conceive of awareness as 'awareness of …' and that anything other than that is complete anathema. As imperceptible as those conquistador ships on the horizon were said to be for the Incas. Pretty sure that's what we're up against here. For me subconscious mental processing and sensory perception tend to go in tandem in any state over and above NS. Where it gets interesting is between subconscious mental processing (SMP) and conscious mind talk (CMT), aka thought. Essentially we're talking about different 'levels' of cognition, and what is requisite for any given experience. This is what I've described as the grey area and have said that it's hard to pinpoint where one transitions into the other, where SMP transitions into CMT. Along with the spontaneous into the habitual. Anyway, I don't think I'm going to get to explore the interesting part with them if even the awareness part is apples and oranges. As far as how I experience it, ATA-T is actually quite ordinary, and the only difference between now and even long before I read Tolle is that I have a conceptual notion of it and it sometimes even seems to happen deliberately (but, at this point, the notion of "attendance" well .. ha! ha! .. ..). I can't imagine someone absent reference for it - which doesn't mean it isn't possible, but I have to speculate to some degree. Rather, it seems to me that it actually frightens or at least discomforts some people when it happens, "bores" many others, and most people just simply aren't aware of the significance of it. I wouldn't necessarily disagree with any of that, especially the last line. Although maybe I'm conflating it more with a deep-flow or even a CC type state. I think it's a more 'being present' state than is particularly common. But Tenka has said in the past that you can't wipe your butt or get out of bed without the thought to do so, and If I remember rightly, sree recently said that if you stop thinking you will die. Otoh we prolly all have reference for driving in traffic on autopilot, and zd supposedly has someone who works in air traffic control like it. Yet those learned behaviours would likely have required thought at some stage but have since become 'body-known'. In which case, is that spontaneous or habitual, and what is the relevance of that. So perhaps worth poking around a bit to try to see what's going on. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Oct 31, 2022 11:32:10 GMT -5
As far as how I experience it, ATA-T is actually quite ordinary, and the only difference between now and even long before I read Tolle is that I have a conceptual notion of it and it sometimes even seems to happen deliberately (but, at this point, the notion of "attendance" well .. ha! ha! .. ..). I can't imagine someone absent reference for it - which doesn't mean it isn't possible, but I have to speculate to some degree. Rather, it seems to me that it actually frightens or at least discomforts some people when it happens, "bores" many others, and most people just simply aren't aware of the significance of it. I wouldn't necessarily disagree with any of that, especially the last line. Although maybe I'm conflating it more with a deep-flow or even a CC type state. I think it's a more 'being present' state than is particularly common. But Tenka has said in the past that you can't wipe your butt or get out of bed without the thought to do so, and If I remember rightly, sree recently said that if you stop thinking you will die. Otoh we prolly all have reference for driving in traffic on autopilot, and zd supposedly has someone who works in air traffic control like it. Yet those learned behaviours would likely have required thought at some stage but have since become 'body-known'. In which case, is that spontaneous or habitual, and what is the relevance of that. So perhaps worth poking around a bit to try to see what's going on. I think that where/when there is intention, there is a thought. So then I ask myself, 'does a new born baby experience intention?'. If I say there is a line between 'conscious and unconscious' action, then I think I'd be inclined to say that a new born baby is unconscious, and does not experience intention (or thought). But if all 'conscious and unconscious' action is actually just degrees of consciousness (or unconsciousness), then logically I'd have to say that a baby experiences intention to some degree, and therefore 'thought'. I know Tenka's view pretty well, and I don't think he distinguishes between 'conscious and unconscious'. For him there is only 'being conscious' and in contrast to 'being conscious' there is what what he calls 'the realized state' or 'the unmanifest state', which may equate to what others call NS. So for Tenka, a plant, or even an atom could be said to be conscious, and intending, and there would be a thought. So it's a definition of 'thought' that is far broader than most people's definition here, who consider 'thought' to be associated with cognition and 'conscious' intention. I'm curious if I misrepresented Tenka, let's see  To be clear, I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong here, I'm just trying to add clarity to the different definitions and contexts being discussed. My contribution to the word salad |
|
|
|
Post by sree on Oct 31, 2022 11:56:24 GMT -5
As far as how I experience it, ATA-T is actually quite ordinary, and the only difference between now and even long before I read Tolle is that I have a conceptual notion of it and it sometimes even seems to happen deliberately (but, at this point, the notion of "attendance" well .. ha! ha! .. ..). I can't imagine someone absent reference for it - which doesn't mean it isn't possible, but I have to speculate to some degree. Rather, it seems to me that it actually frightens or at least discomforts some people when it happens, "bores" many others, and most people just simply aren't aware of the significance of it. I wouldn't necessarily disagree with any of that, especially the last line. Although maybe I'm conflating it more with a deep-flow or even a CC type state. I think it's a more 'being present' state than is particularly common. But Tenka has said in the past that you can't wipe your butt or get out of bed without the thought to do so, and If I remember rightly, sree recently said that if you stop thinking you will die. Otoh we prolly all have reference for driving in traffic on autopilot, and zd supposedly has someone who works in air traffic control like it. Yet those learned behaviours would likely have required thought at some stage but have since become 'body-known'. In which case, is that spontaneous or habitual, and what is the relevance of that. So perhaps worth poking around a bit to try to see what's going on. This is a serious allegation. You have rephrased what I said and it is disinformation. Even if it is not deliberate, misinformation has the same cancelling effect. Cancelling sree, that is.
"If you stop thinking you will die." This statement is so uncharacteristic of sree, from my point of view. "Thinking" is an action word. "Eating" is also an action word. One can stop eating and induce death of the body. Can one stop thinking ever to induce death of the self to bring about the selfless state? Those who believe in ATA-T say that it is possible. Sree is not one of them.
Thinking is an action word. Is there a thinker? Pissing is also an action word. Is there a pisser? |
|
How to describe the instant of THIS! .. 
