Guest guest Posted November 11, 2002 Report Share Posted November 11, 2002 Hi Jan -- > ºOn that list, I'd say the following have been key themes: > º > º the observer is the observed > > As observed by another observer who is that observation? > (the joys of recursion) Yes, quite! > º consciousness is not in a person, and all is consciousness > º (to which I've often said, there's a limitation in > º pointers that say "all is ...... [fill in the blank]") > > "Consciousness is all" is an axiom, like "propagation is in a medium". > The latter however, was verifiable via experiment and debunked ;-) True. > º the known is a function of separating the observer > º and the observed > º thought is the known, and the thinker doesn't > º exist apart from the thought > º whatever is known involves a relationship with its opposite > > The notion of separation is what separates. > "There is a thinker and thought" is another notion. > Stillness of mind, notions suspended, without the use > of the tool "where are they in deep dreamless sleep?" Yes. Dialogue seemingly moves thoughts back and forth, seems to generate interactive responding -- goes round and round, without really going anyhere. As if one thought could touch another. A thought of separation or a thought of unity -- either way, it's a thought. With nothing for a thought to touch, what use is a philosphy about separation or unity? > When the group had public archives, i read for a while but mere > theory isn't interesting: no research projects in that group > to show that time/distance too are notions, and can be temporarily > suspended in for instance telepathy, to shine a different light on > what is termed "siddhis". That sort of thing could bring a more > detailed knowledge of the subset called "perceived reality" and > how that is distorted by "false" notions, similar to the relationship > of an experimenter engaged in quantum mechanics. The theory being spun there is a theory of the end of theory. The use of it is when there isn't a use for it. When no use for it, there is no place not shining, nothing to shed light on. > Noting down notions, Yes. Notions can be enjoyed as such, not intending to get somewhere else by using them ... Unobscured Peace, Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 11, 2002 Report Share Posted November 11, 2002 Good point about the "it's all ....." pointers. OF course that kind of conversational tension will arise on that particular e-list, since it's about consciousness being all. Right? That's a kind of back and forth that I like. Dialectically, --Greg At 02:02 PM 11/11/02 +0000, dan330033 wrote: >On that list, I'd say the following have been key themes: > > the observer is the observed > consciousness is not in a person, and all is consciousness > (to which I've often said, there's a limitation in > pointers that say "all is ...... [fill in the blank]") > the known is a function of separating the observer > and the observed > thought is the known, and the thinker doesn't > exist apart from the thought > whatever is known involves a relationship with its opposite > >Observantly, >Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.