Guest guest Posted January 26, 2005 Report Share Posted January 26, 2005 Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " fmraerdy " <mybox234@b...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " <lbb10@c...> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Who are you? > > > > > > > > > > > > Memory + awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What are you? > > > > > > > > > > > > Memory + awareness. > > > > > > > > > Anders, > > > > > > Since I do not experience awareness and memory as distinct, I wonder > > if, > > > in your experience, when you express in words, do words emerge from > > > awareness and memory as one, or separately coming from each or neither > > > or some other experience? How is your experience of speech and writing > > > related to awareness and memory? > > > > > > Lewis > > > > Awareness I see as being conscious, and memory as phenomena awareness > > is conscious of. All phenomena becomes present in our awareness only > > " after " it has been " created " . Even speech, writing, thoughts e t c > > are phenomena, and is always " old " , always the " past " , and that is why > > I call it memory. > > > > /AL > > > Anders, > > In your experience, does this mean that at the bottom there is simple > awareness and phenomena? If so, are phenomena that have been " created, " > however that is done, called memory? And does this different conception > of memory include all " immediate appearing perceptions " through the > sense system? And would this memory then be a " repository' or simply > synonymous with all phenomena experienced with awareness? > > Lewis From awareness there is a timeline flowing outwards. Our sun, for example, is when experienced some 8 minutes " old " . This is just scientific theory. My idea is that maybe one can go from mere ideas about this timeline to actually experiencing it. If I can sense directly that my awareness is where the future is generated, then all that I sense, that " I " am aware of, is a history track - a " memory " . /AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 26, 2005 Report Share Posted January 26, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " fmraerdy " > <mybox234@b...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " > <lbb10@c...> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Who are you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Memory + awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What are you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Memory + awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > Anders, > > > > > > > > Since I do not experience awareness and memory as distinct, I > wonder > > > if, > > > > in your experience, when you express in words, do words > emerge from > > > > awareness and memory as one, or separately coming from each or > neither > > > > or some other experience? How is your experience of speech and > writing > > > > related to awareness and memory? > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > Awareness I see as being conscious, and memory as phenomena awareness > > > is conscious of. All phenomena becomes present in our awareness only > > > " after " it has been " created " . Even speech, writing, thoughts e t c > > > are phenomena, and is always " old " , always the " past " , and that is why > > > I call it memory. > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > Anders, > > > > In your experience, does this mean that at the bottom there is simple > > awareness and phenomena? If so, are phenomena that have been " created, " > > however that is done, called memory? And does this different conception > > of memory include all " immediate appearing perceptions " through the > > sense system? And would this memory then be a " repository' or simply > > synonymous with all phenomena experienced with awareness? > > > > Lewis > > From awareness there is a timeline flowing outwards. Our sun, for > example, is when experienced some 8 minutes " old " . This is just > scientific theory. My idea is that maybe one can go from mere ideas > about this timeline to actually experiencing it. If I can sense > directly that my awareness is where the future is generated, then all > that I sense, that " I " am aware of, is a history track - a " memory " . > > /AL Anders, When you speak or write is that sensed as coming from memory as you describe? Lewis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " fmraerdy " > > <mybox234@b...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " > > <lbb10@c...> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Who are you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Memory + awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What are you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Memory + awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anders, > > > > > > > > > > Since I do not experience awareness and memory as distinct, I > > wonder > > > > if, > > > > > in your experience, when you express in words, do words > > emerge from > > > > > awareness and memory as one, or separately coming from each or > > neither > > > > > or some other experience? How is your experience of speech and > > writing > > > > > related to awareness and memory? > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > Awareness I see as being conscious, and memory as phenomena > awareness > > > > is conscious of. All phenomena becomes present in our awareness only > > > > " after " it has been " created " . Even speech, writing, thoughts e t c > > > > are phenomena, and is always " old " , always the " past " , and that > is why > > > > I call it memory. > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > Anders, > > > > > > In your experience, does this mean that at the bottom there is simple > > > awareness and phenomena? If so, are phenomena that have been > " created, " > > > however that is done, called memory? And does this different > conception > > > of memory include all " immediate appearing perceptions " through the > > > sense system? And would this memory then be a " repository' or simply > > > synonymous with all phenomena experienced with awareness? > > > > > > Lewis > > > > From awareness there is a timeline flowing outwards. Our sun, for > > example, is when experienced some 8 minutes " old " . This is just > > scientific theory. My idea is that maybe one can go from mere ideas > > about this timeline to actually experiencing it. If I can sense > > directly that my awareness is where the future is generated, then all > > that I sense, that " I " am aware of, is a history track - a " memory " . > > > > /AL > > Anders, > > When you speak or write is that sensed as coming from memory as you > describe? > > Lewis Well, maybe not all of it comes from memory. Sometimes thoughts come more directly from the present moment instead of from previous ideas. There is a mix of previous knowledge and new ideas sometimes. /AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 2005 anders_lindman wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " fmraerdy " > > > <mybox234@b...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " > > > <lbb10@c...> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Who are you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Memory + awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What are you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Memory + awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anders, > > > > > > > > > > > > Since I do not experience awareness and memory as distinct, I > > > wonder > > > > > if, > > > > > > in your experience, when you express in words, do words > > > emerge from > > > > > > awareness and memory as one, or separately coming from each or > > > neither > > > > > > or some other experience? How is your experience of speech and > > > writing > > > > > > related to awareness and memory? > > > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > > > Awareness I see as being conscious, and memory as phenomena > > awareness > > > > > is conscious of. All phenomena becomes present in our > awareness only > > > > > " after " it has been " created " . Even speech, writing, thoughts > e t c > > > > > are phenomena, and is always " old " , always the " past " , and that > > is why > > > > > I call it memory. > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > Anders, > > > > > > > > In your experience, does this mean that at the bottom there is > simple > > > > awareness and phenomena? If so, are phenomena that have been > > " created, " > > > > however that is done, called memory? And does this different > > conception > > > > of memory include all " immediate appearing perceptions " through the > > > > sense system? And would this memory then be a " repository' or > simply > > > > synonymous with all phenomena experienced with awareness? > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > From awareness there is a timeline flowing outwards. Our sun, for > > > example, is when experienced some 8 minutes " old " . This is just > > > scientific theory. My idea is that maybe one can go from mere ideas > > > about this timeline to actually experiencing it. If I can sense > > > directly that my awareness is where the future is generated, then all > > > that I sense, that " I " am aware of, is a history track - a " memory " . > > > > > > /AL > > > > Anders, > > > > When you speak or write is that sensed as coming from memory as you > > describe? > > > > Lewis > > Well, maybe not all of it comes from memory. Sometimes thoughts come > more directly from the present moment instead of from previous ideas. > There is a mix of previous knowledge and new ideas sometimes. > > /AL Hi Anders, What is a new ideas to you Anders? It would be interesting to know how you define it. By doing so I can understand better your experience which seems similar but I do not know what you mean by new ideas. Below is my experience of new ideas and what new means to me. Catherine posted what is below on the AtoZ list n'eva-saññá-n'ásaññáyatana: The 'sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception', is the name for the fourth absorption of the immaterial sphere (arúpávacara), a semi-conscious state, which is surpassed only by the state of complete suspense of consciousness, called 'attainment of extinction' (nirodha-samápatti, q.v.). See jhána (8). When read this I did not understand it and I still do not comprehend it. The words mean something but there are many meanings possible. For example consciousness is mentioned but I do not know what is meant by consciousness here as opposed to all the other ideas of consciousness I have come across. The old ideas arise around this one but none match because of uncertainty as to the intended or reflexive meaning. This goes for extinction, or semi-conscious or fourth absorption (completely new), or immaterial sphere. Since I do not know what these are and what they point to or what they reflexively engage in the full text from where these were drawn, I cannot compare it to any understanding or experience undergone. So in reading it, a blank response occurs and it is " new " to me and curiosity is aroused. The concept of this state is new because I cannot make sense as it is done. So I am curious and moved to study it to see if sense can be made of it by finding the meaning of the words as intended or reflexively engaged and then see if it relates to understandings and experiences known and undergone. This new idea, which may be old for others, will also become " old " once I know it better as it is. Is this similar to your experience of old and new ideas mixing? Lewis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 2005 Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " fmraerdy " > > > > <mybox234@b...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " > > > > <lbb10@c...> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Who are you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Memory + awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What are you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Memory + awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since I do not experience awareness and memory as distinct, I > > > > wonder > > > > > > if, > > > > > > > in your experience, when you express in words, do words > > > > emerge from > > > > > > > awareness and memory as one, or separately coming from each or > > > > neither > > > > > > > or some other experience? How is your experience of speech and > > > > writing > > > > > > > related to awareness and memory? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > > > > > Awareness I see as being conscious, and memory as phenomena > > > awareness > > > > > > is conscious of. All phenomena becomes present in our > > awareness only > > > > > > " after " it has been " created " . Even speech, writing, thoughts > > e t c > > > > > > are phenomena, and is always " old " , always the " past " , and that > > > is why > > > > > > I call it memory. > > > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anders, > > > > > > > > > > In your experience, does this mean that at the bottom there is > > simple > > > > > awareness and phenomena? If so, are phenomena that have been > > > " created, " > > > > > however that is done, called memory? And does this different > > > conception > > > > > of memory include all " immediate appearing perceptions " through the > > > > > sense system? And would this memory then be a " repository' or > > simply > > > > > synonymous with all phenomena experienced with awareness? > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > From awareness there is a timeline flowing outwards. Our sun, for > > > > example, is when experienced some 8 minutes " old " . This is just > > > > scientific theory. My idea is that maybe one can go from mere ideas > > > > about this timeline to actually experiencing it. If I can sense > > > > directly that my awareness is where the future is generated, then all > > > > that I sense, that " I " am aware of, is a history track - a " memory " . > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > Anders, > > > > > > When you speak or write is that sensed as coming from memory as you > > > describe? > > > > > > Lewis > > > > Well, maybe not all of it comes from memory. Sometimes thoughts come > > more directly from the present moment instead of from previous ideas. > > There is a mix of previous knowledge and new ideas sometimes. > > > > /AL > > Hi Anders, > > What is a new ideas to you Anders? It would be interesting to know how > you define it. By doing so I can understand better your experience which > seems similar but I do not know what you mean by new ideas. Below is my > experience of new ideas and what new means to me. > > > Catherine posted what is below on the AtoZ list > > n'eva-saññá-n'ásaññáyatana: > > The 'sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception', is the name for > the fourth absorption of the immaterial sphere (arúpávacara), a > semi-conscious state, which is surpassed only by the state of complete > suspense of consciousness, called 'attainment of extinction' > (nirodha-samápatti, q.v.). See jhána (8). > > When read this I did not understand it and I still do not comprehend it. > The words mean something but there are many meanings possible. For > example consciousness is mentioned but I do not know what is meant by > consciousness here as opposed to all the other ideas of consciousness I > have come across. The old ideas arise around this one but none match > because of uncertainty as to the intended or reflexive meaning. This > goes for extinction, or semi-conscious or fourth absorption (completely > new), or immaterial sphere. Since I do not know what these are and what > they point to or what they reflexively engage in the full text from > where these were drawn, I cannot compare it to any understanding or > experience undergone. So in reading it, a blank response occurs and it > is " new " to me and curiosity is aroused. The concept of this state is > new because I cannot make sense as it is done. So I am curious and moved > to study it to see if sense can be made of it by finding the meaning of > the words as intended or reflexively engaged and then see if it relates > to understandings and experiences known and undergone. This new idea, > which may be old for others, will also become " old " once I know it > better as it is. > > Is this similar to your experience of old and new ideas mixing? > > Lewis Newness is for me related to an 'aha!' feeling. When I don't understand something there is no such 'aha!' being felt. Experience is about familiarity, newness, and the unknown (I leave out the unknowable here, if there is such a thing). This process is in constant flux. What was unknown can become known, and in that transformation there is newness. The human mind working on the level of concepts devours experience in a very rapid pace; if, for example, a movie one watches is not exciting, interesting or in some other way stimulating, the human mind becomes bored. This I believe, is a sign of how powerful the ordinary thinking mind is in the act of conceptualizing everything. A label such as a 'tree' is quickly manifested by the thinking mind. When one looks at a tree the mind quickly conceptualizes the tree and moves on to other things, more interesting things - if forced to observe the tree for more than a short period of time it becomes bored. This is a good capability. Without this hunger for new experiences the mind would be content watching the tree for hours, like someone being very high on illegal substances. Although the thirst for new experiences thus is a good and a natural functioning, it has in our modern human society gone into some extremes. We are always restless searching for new more interesting experiences. And instead of the conceptualizing functioning being a powerful tool it has deteriorated into being a shallow label-making machine that cannot see anything but through its own conceptualizing machinery. My idea of newness is not based on the feeling of not understanding something, but rather the feeling of understanding happening in real-time so to speak. And also the deepening of understanding that goes from conceptualizing to deeper feeling of something. The reason there is often the feeling of not knowing something is that the thinking mind operates solely on the level of concepts, labels. This negative feeling of lack of understanding is a pointer helping us move in another direction: to the deepening of understanding from mere concepts to direct feeling. Nature is telling the thinking mind (itself) that it is time to slow down a bit, to understand that understanding can be more than just conceptual labels. /AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 2005 anders_lindman wrote: > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " <lbb10@c...> > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess > <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess > <lbb10@c...> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " fmraerdy " > > > > > <mybox234@b...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lewis > Burgess " > > > > > <lbb10@c...> > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Who are you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Memory + awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What are you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Memory + awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since I do not experience awareness and memory as > distinct, I > > > > > wonder > > > > > > > if, > > > > > > > > in your experience, when you express in words, do words > > > > > emerge from > > > > > > > > awareness and memory as one, or separately coming from > each or > > > > > neither > > > > > > > > or some other experience? How is your experience of > speech and > > > > > writing > > > > > > > > related to awareness and memory? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Awareness I see as being conscious, and memory as phenomena > > > > awareness > > > > > > > is conscious of. All phenomena becomes present in our > > > awareness only > > > > > > > " after " it has been " created " . Even speech, writing, thoughts > > > e t c > > > > > > > are phenomena, and is always " old " , always the " past " , > and that > > > > is why > > > > > > > I call it memory. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anders, > > > > > > > > > > > > In your experience, does this mean that at the bottom there is > > > simple > > > > > > awareness and phenomena? If so, are phenomena that have been > > > > " created, " > > > > > > however that is done, called memory? And does this different > > > > conception > > > > > > of memory include all " immediate appearing perceptions " > through the > > > > > > sense system? And would this memory then be a " repository' or > > > simply > > > > > > synonymous with all phenomena experienced with awareness? > > > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > > > From awareness there is a timeline flowing outwards. Our sun, for > > > > > example, is when experienced some 8 minutes " old " . This is just > > > > > scientific theory. My idea is that maybe one can go from mere > ideas > > > > > about this timeline to actually experiencing it. If I can sense > > > > > directly that my awareness is where the future is generated, > then all > > > > > that I sense, that " I " am aware of, is a history track - a > " memory " . > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > Anders, > > > > > > > > When you speak or write is that sensed as coming from memory as you > > > > describe? > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > Well, maybe not all of it comes from memory. Sometimes thoughts come > > > more directly from the present moment instead of from previous ideas. > > > There is a mix of previous knowledge and new ideas sometimes. > > > > > > /AL > > > > Hi Anders, > > > > What is a new ideas to you Anders? It would be interesting to know how > > you define it. By doing so I can understand better your experience > which > > seems similar but I do not know what you mean by new ideas. Below is my > > experience of new ideas and what new means to me. > > > > > > Catherine posted what is below on the AtoZ list > > > > n'eva-saññá-n'ásaññáyatana: > > > > The 'sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception', is the name for > > the fourth absorption of the immaterial sphere (arúpávacara), a > > semi-conscious state, which is surpassed only by the state of complete > > suspense of consciousness, called 'attainment of extinction' > > (nirodha-samápatti, q.v.). See jhána (8). > > > > When read this I did not understand it and I still do not comprehend > it. > > The words mean something but there are many meanings possible. For > > example consciousness is mentioned but I do not know what is meant by > > consciousness here as opposed to all the other ideas of consciousness I > > have come across. The old ideas arise around this one but none match > > because of uncertainty as to the intended or reflexive meaning. This > > goes for extinction, or semi-conscious or fourth absorption (completely > > new), or immaterial sphere. Since I do not know what these are and what > > they point to or what they reflexively engage in the full text from > > where these were drawn, I cannot compare it to any understanding or > > experience undergone. So in reading it, a blank response occurs and it > > is " new " to me and curiosity is aroused. The concept of this state is > > new because I cannot make sense as it is done. So I am curious and > moved > > to study it to see if sense can be made of it by finding the meaning of > > the words as intended or reflexively engaged and then see if it relates > > to understandings and experiences known and undergone. This new idea, > > which may be old for others, will also become " old " once I know it > > better as it is. > > > > Is this similar to your experience of old and new ideas mixing? > > > > Lewis > > Newness is for me related to an 'aha!' feeling. When I don't > understand something there is no such 'aha!' being felt. Experience is > about familiarity, newness, and the unknown (I leave out the > unknowable here, if there is such a thing). This process is in > constant flux. What was unknown can become known, and in that > transformation there is newness. > > The human mind working on the level of concepts devours experience in > a very rapid pace; if, for example, a movie one watches is not > exciting, interesting or in some other way stimulating, the human mind > becomes bored. This I believe, is a sign of how powerful the ordinary > thinking mind is in the act of conceptualizing everything. A label > such as a 'tree' is quickly manifested by the thinking mind. When one > looks at a tree the mind quickly conceptualizes the tree and moves on > to other things, more interesting things - if forced to observe the > tree for more than a short period of time it becomes bored. This is a > good capability. Without this hunger for new experiences the mind > would be content watching the tree for hours, like someone being very > high on illegal substances. > > Although the thirst for new experiences thus is a good and a natural > functioning, it has in our modern human society gone into some > extremes. We are always restless searching for new more interesting > experiences. And instead of the conceptualizing functioning being a > powerful tool it has deteriorated into being a shallow label-making > machine that cannot see anything but through its own conceptualizing > machinery. > > My idea of newness is not based on the feeling of not understanding > something, but rather the feeling of understanding happening in > real-time so to speak. And also the deepening of understanding that > goes from conceptualizing to deeper feeling of something. The reason > there is often the feeling of not knowing something is that the > thinking mind operates solely on the level of concepts, labels. This > negative feeling of lack of understanding is a pointer helping us move > in another direction: to the deepening of understanding from mere > concepts to direct feeling. Nature is telling the thinking mind > (itself) that it is time to slow down a bit, to understand that > understanding can be more than just conceptual labels. > > /AL Anders, I was asking about the experience of new ideas in real time and their relation to experience and understanding and not newness in general, which may be different. Your last paragraph points to that, but can please try again? If it is possible, maybe you could try the text that Catherine posted and tell me how you experience it and then relate it to last paragraph. In this way we have a common experience (reading the text) to work from. Lewis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 2005 Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " <lbb10@c...> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess > > <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess > > <lbb10@c...> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " fmraerdy " > > > > > > <mybox234@b...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lewis > > Burgess " > > > > > > <lbb10@c...> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Who are you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Memory + awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What are you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Memory + awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since I do not experience awareness and memory as > > distinct, I > > > > > > wonder > > > > > > > > if, > > > > > > > > > in your experience, when you express in words, do words > > > > > > emerge from > > > > > > > > > awareness and memory as one, or separately coming from > > each or > > > > > > neither > > > > > > > > > or some other experience? How is your experience of > > speech and > > > > > > writing > > > > > > > > > related to awareness and memory? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Awareness I see as being conscious, and memory as phenomena > > > > > awareness > > > > > > > > is conscious of. All phenomena becomes present in our > > > > awareness only > > > > > > > > " after " it has been " created " . Even speech, writing, thoughts > > > > e t c > > > > > > > > are phenomena, and is always " old " , always the " past " , > > and that > > > > > is why > > > > > > > > I call it memory. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In your experience, does this mean that at the bottom there is > > > > simple > > > > > > > awareness and phenomena? If so, are phenomena that have been > > > > > " created, " > > > > > > > however that is done, called memory? And does this different > > > > > conception > > > > > > > of memory include all " immediate appearing perceptions " > > through the > > > > > > > sense system? And would this memory then be a " repository' or > > > > simply > > > > > > > synonymous with all phenomena experienced with awareness? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > > > > > From awareness there is a timeline flowing outwards. Our sun, for > > > > > > example, is when experienced some 8 minutes " old " . This is just > > > > > > scientific theory. My idea is that maybe one can go from mere > > ideas > > > > > > about this timeline to actually experiencing it. If I can sense > > > > > > directly that my awareness is where the future is generated, > > then all > > > > > > that I sense, that " I " am aware of, is a history track - a > > " memory " . > > > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > Anders, > > > > > > > > > > When you speak or write is that sensed as coming from memory as you > > > > > describe? > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > Well, maybe not all of it comes from memory. Sometimes thoughts come > > > > more directly from the present moment instead of from previous ideas. > > > > There is a mix of previous knowledge and new ideas sometimes. > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > Hi Anders, > > > > > > What is a new ideas to you Anders? It would be interesting to know how > > > you define it. By doing so I can understand better your experience > > which > > > seems similar but I do not know what you mean by new ideas. Below is my > > > experience of new ideas and what new means to me. > > > > > > > > > Catherine posted what is below on the AtoZ list > > > > > > n'eva-saññá-n'ásaññáyatana: > > > > > > The 'sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception', is the name for > > > the fourth absorption of the immaterial sphere (arúpávacara), a > > > semi-conscious state, which is surpassed only by the state of complete > > > suspense of consciousness, called 'attainment of extinction' > > > (nirodha-samápatti, q.v.). See jhána (8). > > > > > > When read this I did not understand it and I still do not comprehend > > it. > > > The words mean something but there are many meanings possible. For > > > example consciousness is mentioned but I do not know what is meant by > > > consciousness here as opposed to all the other ideas of consciousness I > > > have come across. The old ideas arise around this one but none match > > > because of uncertainty as to the intended or reflexive meaning. This > > > goes for extinction, or semi-conscious or fourth absorption (completely > > > new), or immaterial sphere. Since I do not know what these are and what > > > they point to or what they reflexively engage in the full text from > > > where these were drawn, I cannot compare it to any understanding or > > > experience undergone. So in reading it, a blank response occurs and it > > > is " new " to me and curiosity is aroused. The concept of this state is > > > new because I cannot make sense as it is done. So I am curious and > > moved > > > to study it to see if sense can be made of it by finding the meaning of > > > the words as intended or reflexively engaged and then see if it relates > > > to understandings and experiences known and undergone. This new idea, > > > which may be old for others, will also become " old " once I know it > > > better as it is. > > > > > > Is this similar to your experience of old and new ideas mixing? > > > > > > Lewis > > > > Newness is for me related to an 'aha!' feeling. When I don't > > understand something there is no such 'aha!' being felt. Experience is > > about familiarity, newness, and the unknown (I leave out the > > unknowable here, if there is such a thing). This process is in > > constant flux. What was unknown can become known, and in that > > transformation there is newness. > > > > The human mind working on the level of concepts devours experience in > > a very rapid pace; if, for example, a movie one watches is not > > exciting, interesting or in some other way stimulating, the human mind > > becomes bored. This I believe, is a sign of how powerful the ordinary > > thinking mind is in the act of conceptualizing everything. A label > > such as a 'tree' is quickly manifested by the thinking mind. When one > > looks at a tree the mind quickly conceptualizes the tree and moves on > > to other things, more interesting things - if forced to observe the > > tree for more than a short period of time it becomes bored. This is a > > good capability. Without this hunger for new experiences the mind > > would be content watching the tree for hours, like someone being very > > high on illegal substances. > > > > Although the thirst for new experiences thus is a good and a natural > > functioning, it has in our modern human society gone into some > > extremes. We are always restless searching for new more interesting > > experiences. And instead of the conceptualizing functioning being a > > powerful tool it has deteriorated into being a shallow label-making > > machine that cannot see anything but through its own conceptualizing > > machinery. > > > > My idea of newness is not based on the feeling of not understanding > > something, but rather the feeling of understanding happening in > > real-time so to speak. And also the deepening of understanding that > > goes from conceptualizing to deeper feeling of something. The reason > > there is often the feeling of not knowing something is that the > > thinking mind operates solely on the level of concepts, labels. This > > negative feeling of lack of understanding is a pointer helping us move > > in another direction: to the deepening of understanding from mere > > concepts to direct feeling. Nature is telling the thinking mind > > (itself) that it is time to slow down a bit, to understand that > > understanding can be more than just conceptual labels. > > > > /AL > > Anders, I was asking about the experience of new ideas in real time and > their relation to experience and understanding and not newness in > general, which may be different. Your last paragraph points to that, but > can please try again? If it is possible, maybe you could try the text > that Catherine posted and tell me how you experience it and then relate > it to last paragraph. In this way we have a common experience (reading > the text) to work from. > > Lewis " The 'sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception', is the name for the fourth absorption of the immaterial sphere. " - This statement, taken as a pointer, indicates a transcension into the unmanifested. Perception as apperceived by the thinking mind is confined to the polar opposites of the conceptual mental sphere. That kind of perception, being very powerful in its own way, is always limited to that sphere. By a fusion between perception in the form of detecting phenomena and a linking up with the unmanifested source of existence, a breaking up of the preclusion held in place by the conceptual sphere takes place spontaneously. /AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 2005 anders_lindman wrote: > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " <lbb10@c...> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess > > > <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess > > > <lbb10@c...> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " fmraerdy " > > > > > > > <mybox234@b...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , > " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lewis > > > Burgess " > > > > > > > <lbb10@c...> > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Who are you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Memory + awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What are you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Memory + awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since I do not experience awareness and memory as > > > distinct, I > > > > > > > wonder > > > > > > > > > if, > > > > > > > > > > in your experience, when you express in words, > do words > > > > > > > emerge from > > > > > > > > > > awareness and memory as one, or separately coming > from > > > each or > > > > > > > neither > > > > > > > > > > or some other experience? How is your experience of > > > speech and > > > > > > > writing > > > > > > > > > > related to awareness and memory? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Awareness I see as being conscious, and memory as > phenomena > > > > > > awareness > > > > > > > > > is conscious of. All phenomena becomes present in our > > > > > awareness only > > > > > > > > > " after " it has been " created " . Even speech, writing, > thoughts > > > > > e t c > > > > > > > > > are phenomena, and is always " old " , always the " past " , > > > and that > > > > > > is why > > > > > > > > > I call it memory. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In your experience, does this mean that at the bottom > there is > > > > > simple > > > > > > > > awareness and phenomena? If so, are phenomena that > have been > > > > > > " created, " > > > > > > > > however that is done, called memory? And does this > different > > > > > > conception > > > > > > > > of memory include all " immediate appearing perceptions " > > > through the > > > > > > > > sense system? And would this memory then be a > " repository' or > > > > > simply > > > > > > > > synonymous with all phenomena experienced with awareness? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From awareness there is a timeline flowing outwards. Our > sun, for > > > > > > > example, is when experienced some 8 minutes " old " . This > is just > > > > > > > scientific theory. My idea is that maybe one can go from > mere > > > ideas > > > > > > > about this timeline to actually experiencing it. If I > can sense > > > > > > > directly that my awareness is where the future is generated, > > > then all > > > > > > > that I sense, that " I " am aware of, is a history track - a > > > " memory " . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > Anders, > > > > > > > > > > > > When you speak or write is that sensed as coming from > memory as you > > > > > > describe? > > > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > > > Well, maybe not all of it comes from memory. Sometimes > thoughts come > > > > > more directly from the present moment instead of from > previous ideas. > > > > > There is a mix of previous knowledge and new ideas sometimes. > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > Hi Anders, > > > > > > > > What is a new ideas to you Anders? It would be interesting to > know how > > > > you define it. By doing so I can understand better your experience > > > which > > > > seems similar but I do not know what you mean by new ideas. > Below is my > > > > experience of new ideas and what new means to me. > > > > > > > > > > > > Catherine posted what is below on the AtoZ list > > > > > > > > n'eva-saññá-n'ásaññáyatana: > > > > > > > > The 'sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception', is the > name for > > > > the fourth absorption of the immaterial sphere (arúpávacara), a > > > > semi-conscious state, which is surpassed only by the state of > complete > > > > suspense of consciousness, called 'attainment of extinction' > > > > (nirodha-samápatti, q.v.). See jhána (8). > > > > > > > > When read this I did not understand it and I still do not > comprehend > > > it. > > > > The words mean something but there are many meanings possible. For > > > > example consciousness is mentioned but I do not know what is > meant by > > > > consciousness here as opposed to all the other ideas of > consciousness I > > > > have come across. The old ideas arise around this one but none > match > > > > because of uncertainty as to the intended or reflexive meaning. > This > > > > goes for extinction, or semi-conscious or fourth absorption > (completely > > > > new), or immaterial sphere. Since I do not know what these are > and what > > > > they point to or what they reflexively engage in the full text from > > > > where these were drawn, I cannot compare it to any understanding or > > > > experience undergone. So in reading it, a blank response occurs > and it > > > > is " new " to me and curiosity is aroused. The concept of this > state is > > > > new because I cannot make sense as it is done. So I am curious and > > > moved > > > > to study it to see if sense can be made of it by finding the > meaning of > > > > the words as intended or reflexively engaged and then see if it > relates > > > > to understandings and experiences known and undergone. This > new idea, > > > > which may be old for others, will also become " old " once I know it > > > > better as it is. > > > > > > > > Is this similar to your experience of old and new ideas mixing? > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > Newness is for me related to an 'aha!' feeling. When I don't > > > understand something there is no such 'aha!' being felt. Experience is > > > about familiarity, newness, and the unknown (I leave out the > > > unknowable here, if there is such a thing). This process is in > > > constant flux. What was unknown can become known, and in that > > > transformation there is newness. > > > > > > The human mind working on the level of concepts devours experience in > > > a very rapid pace; if, for example, a movie one watches is not > > > exciting, interesting or in some other way stimulating, the human mind > > > becomes bored. This I believe, is a sign of how powerful the ordinary > > > thinking mind is in the act of conceptualizing everything. A label > > > such as a 'tree' is quickly manifested by the thinking mind. When one > > > looks at a tree the mind quickly conceptualizes the tree and moves on > > > to other things, more interesting things - if forced to observe the > > > tree for more than a short period of time it becomes bored. This is a > > > good capability. Without this hunger for new experiences the mind > > > would be content watching the tree for hours, like someone being very > > > high on illegal substances. > > > > > > Although the thirst for new experiences thus is a good and a natural > > > functioning, it has in our modern human society gone into some > > > extremes. We are always restless searching for new more interesting > > > experiences. And instead of the conceptualizing functioning being a > > > powerful tool it has deteriorated into being a shallow label-making > > > machine that cannot see anything but through its own conceptualizing > > > machinery. > > > > > > My idea of newness is not based on the feeling of not understanding > > > something, but rather the feeling of understanding happening in > > > real-time so to speak. And also the deepening of understanding that > > > goes from conceptualizing to deeper feeling of something. The reason > > > there is often the feeling of not knowing something is that the > > > thinking mind operates solely on the level of concepts, labels. This > > > negative feeling of lack of understanding is a pointer helping us move > > > in another direction: to the deepening of understanding from mere > > > concepts to direct feeling. Nature is telling the thinking mind > > > (itself) that it is time to slow down a bit, to understand that > > > understanding can be more than just conceptual labels. > > > > > > /AL > > > > Anders, I was asking about the experience of new ideas in real time and > > their relation to experience and understanding and not newness in > > general, which may be different. Your last paragraph points to that, > but > > can please try again? If it is possible, maybe you could try the text > > that Catherine posted and tell me how you experience it and then relate > > it to last paragraph. In this way we have a common experience (reading > > the text) to work from. > > > > Lewis > > " The 'sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception', is the name > for the fourth absorption of the immaterial sphere. " - This statement, > taken as a pointer, indicates a transcension into the unmanifested. > Perception as apperceived by the thinking mind is confined to the > polar opposites of the conceptual mental sphere. That kind of > perception, being very powerful in its own way, is always limited to > that sphere. By a fusion between perception in the form of detecting > phenomena and a linking up with the unmanifested source of existence, > a breaking up of the preclusion held in place by the conceptual sphere > takes place spontaneously. > > /AL Anders! That is amazing! I still get a blank. And I cannot clearly understand what you said either. Some study is required. Lewis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 2005 Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " <lbb10@c...> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess > > > > <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess > > > > <lbb10@c...> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " fmraerdy " > > > > > > > > <mybox234@b...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , > > " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lewis > > > > Burgess " > > > > > > > > <lbb10@c...> > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Who are you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Memory + awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What are you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Memory + awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since I do not experience awareness and memory as > > > > distinct, I > > > > > > > > wonder > > > > > > > > > > if, > > > > > > > > > > > in your experience, when you express in words, > > do words > > > > > > > > emerge from > > > > > > > > > > > awareness and memory as one, or separately coming > > from > > > > each or > > > > > > > > neither > > > > > > > > > > > or some other experience? How is your experience of > > > > speech and > > > > > > > > writing > > > > > > > > > > > related to awareness and memory? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Awareness I see as being conscious, and memory as > > phenomena > > > > > > > awareness > > > > > > > > > > is conscious of. All phenomena becomes present in our > > > > > > awareness only > > > > > > > > > > " after " it has been " created " . Even speech, writing, > > thoughts > > > > > > e t c > > > > > > > > > > are phenomena, and is always " old " , always the " past " , > > > > and that > > > > > > > is why > > > > > > > > > > I call it memory. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In your experience, does this mean that at the bottom > > there is > > > > > > simple > > > > > > > > > awareness and phenomena? If so, are phenomena that > > have been > > > > > > > " created, " > > > > > > > > > however that is done, called memory? And does this > > different > > > > > > > conception > > > > > > > > > of memory include all " immediate appearing perceptions " > > > > through the > > > > > > > > > sense system? And would this memory then be a > > " repository' or > > > > > > simply > > > > > > > > > synonymous with all phenomena experienced with awareness? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From awareness there is a timeline flowing outwards. Our > > sun, for > > > > > > > > example, is when experienced some 8 minutes " old " . This > > is just > > > > > > > > scientific theory. My idea is that maybe one can go from > > mere > > > > ideas > > > > > > > > about this timeline to actually experiencing it. If I > > can sense > > > > > > > > directly that my awareness is where the future is generated, > > > > then all > > > > > > > > that I sense, that " I " am aware of, is a history track - a > > > > " memory " . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When you speak or write is that sensed as coming from > > memory as you > > > > > > > describe? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > > > > > Well, maybe not all of it comes from memory. Sometimes > > thoughts come > > > > > > more directly from the present moment instead of from > > previous ideas. > > > > > > There is a mix of previous knowledge and new ideas sometimes. > > > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > Hi Anders, > > > > > > > > > > What is a new ideas to you Anders? It would be interesting to > > know how > > > > > you define it. By doing so I can understand better your experience > > > > which > > > > > seems similar but I do not know what you mean by new ideas. > > Below is my > > > > > experience of new ideas and what new means to me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Catherine posted what is below on the AtoZ list > > > > > > > > > > n'eva-saññá-n'ásaññáyatana: > > > > > > > > > > The 'sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception', is the > > name for > > > > > the fourth absorption of the immaterial sphere (arúpávacara), a > > > > > semi-conscious state, which is surpassed only by the state of > > complete > > > > > suspense of consciousness, called 'attainment of extinction' > > > > > (nirodha-samápatti, q.v.). See jhána (8). > > > > > > > > > > When read this I did not understand it and I still do not > > comprehend > > > > it. > > > > > The words mean something but there are many meanings possible. For > > > > > example consciousness is mentioned but I do not know what is > > meant by > > > > > consciousness here as opposed to all the other ideas of > > consciousness I > > > > > have come across. The old ideas arise around this one but none > > match > > > > > because of uncertainty as to the intended or reflexive meaning. > > This > > > > > goes for extinction, or semi-conscious or fourth absorption > > (completely > > > > > new), or immaterial sphere. Since I do not know what these are > > and what > > > > > they point to or what they reflexively engage in the full text from > > > > > where these were drawn, I cannot compare it to any understanding or > > > > > experience undergone. So in reading it, a blank response occurs > > and it > > > > > is " new " to me and curiosity is aroused. The concept of this > > state is > > > > > new because I cannot make sense as it is done. So I am curious and > > > > moved > > > > > to study it to see if sense can be made of it by finding the > > meaning of > > > > > the words as intended or reflexively engaged and then see if it > > relates > > > > > to understandings and experiences known and undergone. This > > new idea, > > > > > which may be old for others, will also become " old " once I know it > > > > > better as it is. > > > > > > > > > > Is this similar to your experience of old and new ideas mixing? > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > Newness is for me related to an 'aha!' feeling. When I don't > > > > understand something there is no such 'aha!' being felt. Experience is > > > > about familiarity, newness, and the unknown (I leave out the > > > > unknowable here, if there is such a thing). This process is in > > > > constant flux. What was unknown can become known, and in that > > > > transformation there is newness. > > > > > > > > The human mind working on the level of concepts devours experience in > > > > a very rapid pace; if, for example, a movie one watches is not > > > > exciting, interesting or in some other way stimulating, the human mind > > > > becomes bored. This I believe, is a sign of how powerful the ordinary > > > > thinking mind is in the act of conceptualizing everything. A label > > > > such as a 'tree' is quickly manifested by the thinking mind. When one > > > > looks at a tree the mind quickly conceptualizes the tree and moves on > > > > to other things, more interesting things - if forced to observe the > > > > tree for more than a short period of time it becomes bored. This is a > > > > good capability. Without this hunger for new experiences the mind > > > > would be content watching the tree for hours, like someone being very > > > > high on illegal substances. > > > > > > > > Although the thirst for new experiences thus is a good and a natural > > > > functioning, it has in our modern human society gone into some > > > > extremes. We are always restless searching for new more interesting > > > > experiences. And instead of the conceptualizing functioning being a > > > > powerful tool it has deteriorated into being a shallow label-making > > > > machine that cannot see anything but through its own conceptualizing > > > > machinery. > > > > > > > > My idea of newness is not based on the feeling of not understanding > > > > something, but rather the feeling of understanding happening in > > > > real-time so to speak. And also the deepening of understanding that > > > > goes from conceptualizing to deeper feeling of something. The reason > > > > there is often the feeling of not knowing something is that the > > > > thinking mind operates solely on the level of concepts, labels. This > > > > negative feeling of lack of understanding is a pointer helping us move > > > > in another direction: to the deepening of understanding from mere > > > > concepts to direct feeling. Nature is telling the thinking mind > > > > (itself) that it is time to slow down a bit, to understand that > > > > understanding can be more than just conceptual labels. > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > Anders, I was asking about the experience of new ideas in real time and > > > their relation to experience and understanding and not newness in > > > general, which may be different. Your last paragraph points to that, > > but > > > can please try again? If it is possible, maybe you could try the text > > > that Catherine posted and tell me how you experience it and then relate > > > it to last paragraph. In this way we have a common experience (reading > > > the text) to work from. > > > > > > Lewis > > > > " The 'sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception', is the name > > for the fourth absorption of the immaterial sphere. " - This statement, > > taken as a pointer, indicates a transcension into the unmanifested. > > Perception as apperceived by the thinking mind is confined to the > > polar opposites of the conceptual mental sphere. That kind of > > perception, being very powerful in its own way, is always limited to > > that sphere. By a fusion between perception in the form of detecting > > phenomena and a linking up with the unmanifested source of existence, > > a breaking up of the preclusion held in place by the conceptual sphere > > takes place spontaneously. > > > > /AL > > > Anders! That is amazing! I still get a blank. And I cannot clearly > understand what you said either. Some study is required. > > Lewis Hehe. Do you know that real understanding takes no time? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 2005 anders_lindman wrote: > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess > <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " > <lbb10@c...> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess > > > > > <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess > > > > > <lbb10@c...> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , > " fmraerdy " > > > > > > > > > <mybox234@b...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , > > > " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , > " Lewis > > > > > Burgess " > > > > > > > > > <lbb10@c...> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Who are you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Memory + awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What are you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Memory + awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since I do not experience awareness and > memory as > > > > > distinct, I > > > > > > > > > wonder > > > > > > > > > > > if, > > > > > > > > > > > > in your experience, when you express in words, > > > do words > > > > > > > > > emerge from > > > > > > > > > > > > awareness and memory as one, or separately > coming > > > from > > > > > each or > > > > > > > > > neither > > > > > > > > > > > > or some other experience? How is your > experience of > > > > > speech and > > > > > > > > > writing > > > > > > > > > > > > related to awareness and memory? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Awareness I see as being conscious, and memory as > > > phenomena > > > > > > > > awareness > > > > > > > > > > > is conscious of. All phenomena becomes present > in our > > > > > > > awareness only > > > > > > > > > > > " after " it has been " created " . Even speech, > writing, > > > thoughts > > > > > > > e t c > > > > > > > > > > > are phenomena, and is always " old " , always the > " past " , > > > > > and that > > > > > > > > is why > > > > > > > > > > > I call it memory. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In your experience, does this mean that at the bottom > > > there is > > > > > > > simple > > > > > > > > > > awareness and phenomena? If so, are phenomena that > > > have been > > > > > > > > " created, " > > > > > > > > > > however that is done, called memory? And does this > > > different > > > > > > > > conception > > > > > > > > > > of memory include all " immediate appearing > perceptions " > > > > > through the > > > > > > > > > > sense system? And would this memory then be a > > > " repository' or > > > > > > > simply > > > > > > > > > > synonymous with all phenomena experienced with > awareness? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From awareness there is a timeline flowing > outwards. Our > > > sun, for > > > > > > > > > example, is when experienced some 8 minutes " old " . This > > > is just > > > > > > > > > scientific theory. My idea is that maybe one can go > from > > > mere > > > > > ideas > > > > > > > > > about this timeline to actually experiencing it. If I > > > can sense > > > > > > > > > directly that my awareness is where the future is > generated, > > > > > then all > > > > > > > > > that I sense, that " I " am aware of, is a history > track - a > > > > > " memory " . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When you speak or write is that sensed as coming from > > > memory as you > > > > > > > > describe? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well, maybe not all of it comes from memory. Sometimes > > > thoughts come > > > > > > > more directly from the present moment instead of from > > > previous ideas. > > > > > > > There is a mix of previous knowledge and new ideas > sometimes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Anders, > > > > > > > > > > > > What is a new ideas to you Anders? It would be interesting to > > > know how > > > > > > you define it. By doing so I can understand better your > experience > > > > > which > > > > > > seems similar but I do not know what you mean by new ideas. > > > Below is my > > > > > > experience of new ideas and what new means to me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Catherine posted what is below on the AtoZ list > > > > > > > > > > > > n'eva-saññá-n'ásaññáyatana: > > > > > > > > > > > > The 'sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception', is the > > > name for > > > > > > the fourth absorption of the immaterial sphere > (arúpávacara), a > > > > > > semi-conscious state, which is surpassed only by the state of > > > complete > > > > > > suspense of consciousness, called 'attainment of extinction' > > > > > > (nirodha-samápatti, q.v.). See jhána (8). > > > > > > > > > > > > When read this I did not understand it and I still do not > > > comprehend > > > > > it. > > > > > > The words mean something but there are many meanings > possible. For > > > > > > example consciousness is mentioned but I do not know what is > > > meant by > > > > > > consciousness here as opposed to all the other ideas of > > > consciousness I > > > > > > have come across. The old ideas arise around this one but none > > > match > > > > > > because of uncertainty as to the intended or reflexive > meaning. > > > This > > > > > > goes for extinction, or semi-conscious or fourth absorption > > > (completely > > > > > > new), or immaterial sphere. Since I do not know what these are > > > and what > > > > > > they point to or what they reflexively engage in the full > text from > > > > > > where these were drawn, I cannot compare it to any > understanding or > > > > > > experience undergone. So in reading it, a blank response > occurs > > > and it > > > > > > is " new " to me and curiosity is aroused. The concept of this > > > state is > > > > > > new because I cannot make sense as it is done. So I am > curious and > > > > > moved > > > > > > to study it to see if sense can be made of it by finding the > > > meaning of > > > > > > the words as intended or reflexively engaged and then see > if it > > > relates > > > > > > to understandings and experiences known and undergone. This > > > new idea, > > > > > > which may be old for others, will also become " old " once I > know it > > > > > > better as it is. > > > > > > > > > > > > Is this similar to your experience of old and new ideas > mixing? > > > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > > > Newness is for me related to an 'aha!' feeling. When I don't > > > > > understand something there is no such 'aha!' being felt. > Experience is > > > > > about familiarity, newness, and the unknown (I leave out the > > > > > unknowable here, if there is such a thing). This process is in > > > > > constant flux. What was unknown can become known, and in that > > > > > transformation there is newness. > > > > > > > > > > The human mind working on the level of concepts devours > experience in > > > > > a very rapid pace; if, for example, a movie one watches is not > > > > > exciting, interesting or in some other way stimulating, the > human mind > > > > > becomes bored. This I believe, is a sign of how powerful the > ordinary > > > > > thinking mind is in the act of conceptualizing everything. A > label > > > > > such as a 'tree' is quickly manifested by the thinking mind. > When one > > > > > looks at a tree the mind quickly conceptualizes the tree and > moves on > > > > > to other things, more interesting things - if forced to > observe the > > > > > tree for more than a short period of time it becomes bored. > This is a > > > > > good capability. Without this hunger for new experiences the mind > > > > > would be content watching the tree for hours, like someone > being very > > > > > high on illegal substances. > > > > > > > > > > Although the thirst for new experiences thus is a good and a > natural > > > > > functioning, it has in our modern human society gone into some > > > > > extremes. We are always restless searching for new more > interesting > > > > > experiences. And instead of the conceptualizing functioning > being a > > > > > powerful tool it has deteriorated into being a shallow > label-making > > > > > machine that cannot see anything but through its own > conceptualizing > > > > > machinery. > > > > > > > > > > My idea of newness is not based on the feeling of not > understanding > > > > > something, but rather the feeling of understanding happening in > > > > > real-time so to speak. And also the deepening of > understanding that > > > > > goes from conceptualizing to deeper feeling of something. The > reason > > > > > there is often the feeling of not knowing something is that the > > > > > thinking mind operates solely on the level of concepts, > labels. This > > > > > negative feeling of lack of understanding is a pointer > helping us move > > > > > in another direction: to the deepening of understanding from mere > > > > > concepts to direct feeling. Nature is telling the thinking mind > > > > > (itself) that it is time to slow down a bit, to understand that > > > > > understanding can be more than just conceptual labels. > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > Anders, I was asking about the experience of new ideas in real > time and > > > > their relation to experience and understanding and not newness in > > > > general, which may be different. Your last paragraph points to > that, > > > but > > > > can please try again? If it is possible, maybe you could try > the text > > > > that Catherine posted and tell me how you experience it and > then relate > > > > it to last paragraph. In this way we have a common experience > (reading > > > > the text) to work from. > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > " The 'sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception', is the name > > > for the fourth absorption of the immaterial sphere. " - This statement, > > > taken as a pointer, indicates a transcension into the unmanifested. > > > Perception as apperceived by the thinking mind is confined to the > > > polar opposites of the conceptual mental sphere. That kind of > > > perception, being very powerful in its own way, is always limited to > > > that sphere. By a fusion between perception in the form of detecting > > > phenomena and a linking up with the unmanifested source of existence, > > > a breaking up of the preclusion held in place by the conceptual sphere > > > takes place spontaneously. > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > Anders! That is amazing! I still get a blank. And I cannot clearly > > understand what you said either. Some study is required. > > > > Lewis > > Hehe. Do you know that real understanding takes no time? Yes. And in this case I have zero to work with. Lewis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 2005 Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess > > <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " > > <lbb10@c...> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess > > > > > > <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess > > > > > > <lbb10@c...> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , > > " fmraerdy " > > > > > > > > > > <mybox234@b...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , > > > > " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , > > " Lewis > > > > > > Burgess " > > > > > > > > > > <lbb10@c...> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Who are you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Memory + awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What are you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Memory + awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since I do not experience awareness and > > memory as > > > > > > distinct, I > > > > > > > > > > wonder > > > > > > > > > > > > if, > > > > > > > > > > > > > in your experience, when you express in words, > > > > do words > > > > > > > > > > emerge from > > > > > > > > > > > > > awareness and memory as one, or separately > > coming > > > > from > > > > > > each or > > > > > > > > > > neither > > > > > > > > > > > > > or some other experience? How is your > > experience of > > > > > > speech and > > > > > > > > > > writing > > > > > > > > > > > > > related to awareness and memory? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Awareness I see as being conscious, and memory as > > > > phenomena > > > > > > > > > awareness > > > > > > > > > > > > is conscious of. All phenomena becomes present > > in our > > > > > > > > awareness only > > > > > > > > > > > > " after " it has been " created " . Even speech, > > writing, > > > > thoughts > > > > > > > > e t c > > > > > > > > > > > > are phenomena, and is always " old " , always the > > " past " , > > > > > > and that > > > > > > > > > is why > > > > > > > > > > > > I call it memory. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In your experience, does this mean that at the bottom > > > > there is > > > > > > > > simple > > > > > > > > > > > awareness and phenomena? If so, are phenomena that > > > > have been > > > > > > > > > " created, " > > > > > > > > > > > however that is done, called memory? And does this > > > > different > > > > > > > > > conception > > > > > > > > > > > of memory include all " immediate appearing > > perceptions " > > > > > > through the > > > > > > > > > > > sense system? And would this memory then be a > > > > " repository' or > > > > > > > > simply > > > > > > > > > > > synonymous with all phenomena experienced with > > awareness? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From awareness there is a timeline flowing > > outwards. Our > > > > sun, for > > > > > > > > > > example, is when experienced some 8 minutes " old " . This > > > > is just > > > > > > > > > > scientific theory. My idea is that maybe one can go > > from > > > > mere > > > > > > ideas > > > > > > > > > > about this timeline to actually experiencing it. If I > > > > can sense > > > > > > > > > > directly that my awareness is where the future is > > generated, > > > > > > then all > > > > > > > > > > that I sense, that " I " am aware of, is a history > > track - a > > > > > > " memory " . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When you speak or write is that sensed as coming from > > > > memory as you > > > > > > > > > describe? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well, maybe not all of it comes from memory. Sometimes > > > > thoughts come > > > > > > > > more directly from the present moment instead of from > > > > previous ideas. > > > > > > > > There is a mix of previous knowledge and new ideas > > sometimes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Anders, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is a new ideas to you Anders? It would be interesting to > > > > know how > > > > > > > you define it. By doing so I can understand better your > > experience > > > > > > which > > > > > > > seems similar but I do not know what you mean by new ideas. > > > > Below is my > > > > > > > experience of new ideas and what new means to me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Catherine posted what is below on the AtoZ list > > > > > > > > > > > > > > n'eva-saññá-n'ásaññáyatana: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The 'sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception', is the > > > > name for > > > > > > > the fourth absorption of the immaterial sphere > > (arúpávacara), a > > > > > > > semi-conscious state, which is surpassed only by the state of > > > > complete > > > > > > > suspense of consciousness, called 'attainment of extinction' > > > > > > > (nirodha-samápatti, q.v.). See jhána (8). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When read this I did not understand it and I still do not > > > > comprehend > > > > > > it. > > > > > > > The words mean something but there are many meanings > > possible. For > > > > > > > example consciousness is mentioned but I do not know what is > > > > meant by > > > > > > > consciousness here as opposed to all the other ideas of > > > > consciousness I > > > > > > > have come across. The old ideas arise around this one but none > > > > match > > > > > > > because of uncertainty as to the intended or reflexive > > meaning. > > > > This > > > > > > > goes for extinction, or semi-conscious or fourth absorption > > > > (completely > > > > > > > new), or immaterial sphere. Since I do not know what these are > > > > and what > > > > > > > they point to or what they reflexively engage in the full > > text from > > > > > > > where these were drawn, I cannot compare it to any > > understanding or > > > > > > > experience undergone. So in reading it, a blank response > > occurs > > > > and it > > > > > > > is " new " to me and curiosity is aroused. The concept of this > > > > state is > > > > > > > new because I cannot make sense as it is done. So I am > > curious and > > > > > > moved > > > > > > > to study it to see if sense can be made of it by finding the > > > > meaning of > > > > > > > the words as intended or reflexively engaged and then see > > if it > > > > relates > > > > > > > to understandings and experiences known and undergone. This > > > > new idea, > > > > > > > which may be old for others, will also become " old " once I > > know it > > > > > > > better as it is. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is this similar to your experience of old and new ideas > > mixing? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > > > > > Newness is for me related to an 'aha!' feeling. When I don't > > > > > > understand something there is no such 'aha!' being felt. > > Experience is > > > > > > about familiarity, newness, and the unknown (I leave out the > > > > > > unknowable here, if there is such a thing). This process is in > > > > > > constant flux. What was unknown can become known, and in that > > > > > > transformation there is newness. > > > > > > > > > > > > The human mind working on the level of concepts devours > > experience in > > > > > > a very rapid pace; if, for example, a movie one watches is not > > > > > > exciting, interesting or in some other way stimulating, the > > human mind > > > > > > becomes bored. This I believe, is a sign of how powerful the > > ordinary > > > > > > thinking mind is in the act of conceptualizing everything. A > > label > > > > > > such as a 'tree' is quickly manifested by the thinking mind. > > When one > > > > > > looks at a tree the mind quickly conceptualizes the tree and > > moves on > > > > > > to other things, more interesting things - if forced to > > observe the > > > > > > tree for more than a short period of time it becomes bored. > > This is a > > > > > > good capability. Without this hunger for new experiences the mind > > > > > > would be content watching the tree for hours, like someone > > being very > > > > > > high on illegal substances. > > > > > > > > > > > > Although the thirst for new experiences thus is a good and a > > natural > > > > > > functioning, it has in our modern human society gone into some > > > > > > extremes. We are always restless searching for new more > > interesting > > > > > > experiences. And instead of the conceptualizing functioning > > being a > > > > > > powerful tool it has deteriorated into being a shallow > > label-making > > > > > > machine that cannot see anything but through its own > > conceptualizing > > > > > > machinery. > > > > > > > > > > > > My idea of newness is not based on the feeling of not > > understanding > > > > > > something, but rather the feeling of understanding happening in > > > > > > real-time so to speak. And also the deepening of > > understanding that > > > > > > goes from conceptualizing to deeper feeling of something. The > > reason > > > > > > there is often the feeling of not knowing something is that the > > > > > > thinking mind operates solely on the level of concepts, > > labels. This > > > > > > negative feeling of lack of understanding is a pointer > > helping us move > > > > > > in another direction: to the deepening of understanding from mere > > > > > > concepts to direct feeling. Nature is telling the thinking mind > > > > > > (itself) that it is time to slow down a bit, to understand that > > > > > > understanding can be more than just conceptual labels. > > > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > Anders, I was asking about the experience of new ideas in real > > time and > > > > > their relation to experience and understanding and not newness in > > > > > general, which may be different. Your last paragraph points to > > that, > > > > but > > > > > can please try again? If it is possible, maybe you could try > > the text > > > > > that Catherine posted and tell me how you experience it and > > then relate > > > > > it to last paragraph. In this way we have a common experience > > (reading > > > > > the text) to work from. > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > " The 'sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception', is the name > > > > for the fourth absorption of the immaterial sphere. " - This statement, > > > > taken as a pointer, indicates a transcension into the unmanifested. > > > > Perception as apperceived by the thinking mind is confined to the > > > > polar opposites of the conceptual mental sphere. That kind of > > > > perception, being very powerful in its own way, is always limited to > > > > that sphere. By a fusion between perception in the form of detecting > > > > phenomena and a linking up with the unmanifested source of existence, > > > > a breaking up of the preclusion held in place by the conceptual sphere > > > > takes place spontaneously. > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > Anders! That is amazing! I still get a blank. And I cannot clearly > > > understand what you said either. Some study is required. > > > > > > Lewis > > > > Hehe. Do you know that real understanding takes no time? > > Yes. And in this case I have zero to work with. > > > Lewis Good. Now you have reached the point of a conceptual dead end. There is always another way... 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.