Guest guest Posted April 25, 2006 Report Share Posted April 25, 2006 >>>>Are you suggesting thoughts can be effectively selected or controlled? >>>> Phil >>Yes, I am saying that. >>And, I don't think doing so is that difficult or special either! >>I don't mean to imply it's not working for you. My emphasis is not so much on whether it is 'working' for me or not! Rather, I am stating that I have 'observed' the above to be a Fact! To understand what I mean, consider the following example: I have observed that I am lactose intolerant and thus, when I consume milk or milk-products ....it produces gas and I feel bloated! Now, IMO... the above statement stands as a 'fact' irrespective of whether I keep drinking tea, coffee [with milk] or consuming other milk products or not! On the similar lines, consider 'facts' like cigarette smoking increases the chances of lung cancer! Eating food rich in sugar, fat and carbohydrates increases chances of obesity and heart-failure! These statements stands on their own whether those who *know* it are able *follow* it and do the *sane* thing or not! >>If it is, then it is, but I've given up such attempts because it's no longer aligned with my understanding. What is the 'understanding' that you are referring to in the above statement, Phil? >>Of course, it is effective in bringing about short term experiences that are very pleasant, but it sounds like you're talking about a continuous process. Don't 'short term experiences' when repeated enough...get *transformed* into long-term deep rooted habits? Isn't this *how* most 'conditioning' as well as *habits* work? >>I find that control is an illusion and also resistance, whereas my approach is acceptance/nonresistance. If that is indeed so, isn't 'resistance' too part of the wholesome *nature* that we must accept? Is there anything that is outside of the *whole*? >>I've also noticed that thought doesn't seem to pop into conscious awareness all at once, but rather arises from deeper levels of consciousness, emerging into awareness. Of course, it wouldn't be possible to control the thoughts that wander around in the unconscious, and I have a concern that conscious suppression exacerbates unconscious activity. I am not talking about 'suppression', Phil. I find 'suppression' unnecessary in this case. I am talking about not giving more *food* to that [thought] which you don't want to grow! I will try to elaborate it a little in my next message on the subject. >>Do you share any of those concerns? I hope I have answered these above. >>Phil Thanks a lot for your mail, Phil! I enjoyed reading your message and responding to you. With warm regards, Arvind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 26, 2006 Report Share Posted April 26, 2006 In a message dated 4/25/2006 2:54:06 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Nisargadatta writes: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 20:05:59 -0000 " Arvind " <adithya_comming Re: Imagine . . . / Phil >>>>Are you suggesting thoughts can be effectively selected or controlled? >>>> Phil >>Yes, I am saying that. >>And, I don't think doing so is that difficult or special either! >>I don't mean to imply it's not working for you. My emphasis is not so much on whether it is 'working' for me or not! Rather, I am stating that I have 'observed' the above to be a Fact! To understand what I mean, consider the following example: I have observed that I am lactose intolerant and thus, when I consume milk or milk-products ....it produces gas and I feel bloated! Now, IMO... the above statement stands as a 'fact' irrespective of whether I keep drinking tea, coffee [with milk] or consuming other milk products or not! On the similar lines, consider 'facts' like cigarette smoking increases the chances of lung cancer! Eating food rich in sugar, fat and carbohydrates increases chances of obesity and heart-failure! These statements stands on their own whether those who *know* it are able *follow* it and do the *sane* thing or not! >>If it is, then it is, but I've given up such attempts because it's no longer aligned with my understanding. What is the 'understanding' that you are referring to in the above statement, Phil? Phil: I mean the understanding of the value of nonresistance described in the rest of the post. >>Of course, it is effective in bringing about short term experiences that are very pleasant, but it sounds like you're talking about a continuous process. Don't 'short term experiences' when repeated enough...get *transformed* into long-term deep rooted habits? Isn't this *how* most 'conditioning' as well as *habits* work? Phil: Yes, that's true. I see conditioning and habits as developing passively, even though they may be reactions to resistance. Controlling disciplines have the nature of being an activity formed in resistance, which makes them different to me. >>I find that control is an illusion and also resistance, whereas my approach is acceptance/nonresistance. If that is indeed so, isn't 'resistance' too part of the wholesome *nature* that we must accept? Phil: Yes, in fact, resistance fully accepted is no longer resistance because of the nature of acceptance, but this is different than intentional resistance. You don't hit yourself in the head with a hammer and justify it by saying hammer hitting is part of what must be accepted as well. Is there anything that is outside of the *whole*? >>I've also noticed that thought doesn't seem to pop into conscious awareness all at once, but rather arises from deeper levels of consciousness, emerging into awareness. Of course, it wouldn't be possible to control the thoughts that wander around in the unconscious, and I have a concern that conscious suppression exacerbates unconscious activity. I am not talking about 'suppression', Phil. I find 'suppression' unnecessary in this case. I am talking about not giving more *food* to that [thought] which you don't want to grow! Phil: Okay, it was just an idea. I don't know that it occurs, but if it does, you wouldn't be aware of it since it would occur prior to the conscious selection of thoughts. As it is, the thought must arise before you can 'release' it. BTW, I'm in favor of not pursuing what I call 'thought trains' and I do this myself. In my case, this comes about in the recognition of the pointlessness of those trains of thought rather than any sort of controlling. Could we be talking about the same thing? I will try to elaborate it a little in my next message on the subject. >>Do you share any of those concerns? I hope I have answered these above. >>Phil Thanks a lot for your mail, Phil! I enjoyed reading your message and responding to you. With warm regards, Arvind. Phil: Me too. Thanks for your kindness, Arvind. Phil 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.