Guest guest Posted September 21, 2004 Report Share Posted September 21, 2004 Any question that you can formulate about the nature of thought....has to come from within your present assumptions about thought.... Do you suppose that it is possible for thought to see its own blind spot? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2004 Report Share Posted September 21, 2004 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > Any question that you can formulate about the nature of thought....has to come from within your present assumptions about thought.... > > Do you suppose that it is possible for thought to see its own blind spot? Toombaru my friend! Ok! Want I simply mean is the emptyness between two toughts? That is what you may mean when you write .... word.... then ..... another word. You know what I mean? Alberto? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2004 Report Share Posted September 21, 2004 Nisargadatta , " ilikezen2004 " <ilikezen2004> wrote: > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> > wrote: > > Any question that you can formulate about the nature of > thought....has to come from within your present assumptions about > thought.... > > > > Do you suppose that it is possible for thought to see its own > blind spot? > > Toombaru my friend! > Ok! Want I simply mean is the emptyness between two toughts? That is > what you may mean when you write .... word.... then ..... another > word. You know what I mean? > Alberto? I know that you are fond of this thought about a thought having an empty space next to it.......but...... in this concept.... a thought would have to be an actual thing....surrounded by emptiness....... an isolated......totally alone thought.... unconnected to any other thought...... That......is very difficlult to think about.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2004 Report Share Posted September 21, 2004 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > Nisargadatta , " ilikezen2004 " <ilikezen2004> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> > > wrote: > > > Any question that you can formulate about the nature of > > thought....has to come from within your present assumptions about > > thought.... > > > > > > Do you suppose that it is possible for thought to see its own > > blind spot? > > > > Toombaru my friend! > > Ok! Want I simply mean is the emptyness between two toughts? That is > > what you may mean when you write .... word.... then ..... another > > word. You know what I mean? > > Alberto? > > > I know that you are fond of this thought about a thought having an empty space next to it.......but...... > in this concept.... > > > That......is very difficlult to think about.. Well , finally you've answered my question. And the answer is you cannot! As simply as that. No offence nothing at all! And my answer to this question is yes Masters can! Most of them. I personaly would believe all of them can. But I don't know them all. Ramana Maharshi can, well he speaks of that in his books. Pete talks about that in his message. I can! so, that doesn't mean " I " 'm somebody! And it is exactly as you describe it: a thought would have to be an actual thing....surrounded by emptiness....... > > an isolated......totally alone thought.... > > unconnected to any other thought...... That 's how it works... but you mix-up thoughts and the mind. The world and your whole beeing in in the Mind. Toughts are let's say in you head! As your head is on top of your head. thoughts are lets say in you head! You don't lose consciousness. When Ramana does Darshan with his disciples. Disciples only watching the master. When no one talks! Do you really think he is there thinking and thinking and thinking. He is in sahaj samadhi. He has the eyes open samadhi!! Ramana didn't care about thinking at all he live in non-thinking. no thoughts=non-thinking. Zen masters know that!!! and we haven't talk about consciousness yet!! 6th stage master says I am consciousness. Master nisargadatta the great. Well for me! hihi! says look beyond, look beyond. Of course he is a 7th stage master!! Alberto, Respectfully, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2004 Report Share Posted September 21, 2004 Any question that you can formulate about the nature of thought....has to come from within your present assumptions about thought.... Do you suppose that it is possible for thought to see its own blind spot? >>>>>>>>>>>> Thought doesn't " see " as I see it. Thought is just a residue of something *much quicker*. Thought is a minor topic in my view. It doesn't really account for much. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2004 Report Share Posted September 21, 2004 Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <plexus@a...> wrote: > Any question that you can formulate about the nature of thought....has to come from within your present assumptions about thought.... > > Do you suppose that it is possible for thought to see its own blind spot? > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > Thought doesn't " see " as I see it. Thought is just a residue of something > *much quicker*. ahhhhhhhhh .......someone........... I recall ...... compared thoughts to the flotsam after the collapse of a wave function..............the swirling bits and pieces...........pulled this way and that..........by forces beyond their control........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2004 Report Share Posted September 22, 2004 Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <plexus@a...> wrote: > Any question that you can formulate about the nature of thought....has to come from within your present assumptions about thought.... > > Do you suppose that it is possible for thought to see its own blind spot? > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > Thought doesn't " see " as I see it. Thought is just a residue of something > *much quicker*. ahhhhhhhhh .......someone........... I recall ...... compared thoughts to the flotsam after the collapse of a wave function..............the swirling bits and pieces...........pulled this way and that..........by forces beyond their control........ >>>>>>>>>>> exactly! detritus... which is beautiful in its own way it you don't go around collecting it! Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2004 Report Share Posted September 22, 2004 Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <plexus@a...> wrote: > > > Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <plexus@a...> wrote: > > Any question that you can formulate about the nature of thought....has to come from > within your present assumptions about thought.... > > > > Do you suppose that it is possible for thought to see its own blind spot? > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > Thought doesn't " see " as I see it. Thought is just a residue of something > > *much quicker*. > > > ahhhhhhhhh > > ......someone........... I recall ...... compared thoughts to the flotsam after the > collapse of a wave function..............the swirling bits and pieces...........pulled this way and > that..........by forces beyond their control........ > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > exactly! > detritus... > > which is beautiful in its own way > it you don't go around collecting it! > > > Bill Ahhhh.......but Bill..........what if that is all that " we " are? Divine detritus............. (Laughter happening here now) ........and what are you doing up this late at night?............. Sweet dreams.......my friend. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2004 Report Share Posted September 22, 2004 Hi again Bill, >>> Any question that you can formulate about the nature of thought....has to come from within your present assumptions about thought.... > > Do you suppose that it is possible for thought to see its own blind spot?>>> >> Thought doesn't " see " as I see it>> Yes, thought does not 'see' or perceive. >>Thought is just a residue of something > *much quicker*.>> Thoughts are used by us and sometimes 'we are used by them'. >>> Thought is a minor topic in my view. > It doesn't really account for much.>>> I don't know why you have written the above. Unless it is in some other context or I am not interpreting it correctly or seeing it in a different context. Thoughts are the biggest influencing factor of our lives, they are necessary, we cannot live 'without' them, and the way we think and our state of mind is the most important factor we have available to us to influence change in order to change our lives. All your emotional states, contentment and discontent, happiness and sadness and so on, arise with your thoughts. Kind Regards, Scott Andersen 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.