Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Can Thought Think About Itself?

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Pere: > A thought is to thinking, like this phrase,

> appearing in your screen, is to the

> software that created it.

A thought is > just as symbolic and dead, while thinking

> is alive, an unseen magic, always brewed

> in the dark. It happens away from the

> preying eyes of awareness and knowing.

 

How can a living thinking process produce a dead thought? A human can make

a pole with a stop sign on it which is not alive. But a thought is not dead.

It may not exist in the same dimension as thinking itself, and may be like an

image flickering on a movie screen, but not dead.

 

>

> Before you label thinking as ineffectual as

> a puff of smoke, remember you are, right now,

> using a computer, which uses electricity, and

> requires a very complex technological civilization,

> created by that very thinking process. If thinking

> were ineffectual you would be reading smoke

> signals from the next hill, instead.

 

L.E: Not a good example. It thinking were ineffectual there would be no

smoke signals on the next hill. Smoke signals are quite different from anything

a

rock can do.

 

>

> But when thinking about myself, thinking, is

> indeed ineffectual because myself is just

> thoughts, and memories flashing by, and

> thinking has no power to illuminate its own

> dark machinations, just as we can't see

> photons using light.

>

> Pete

 

L.E: I can only think about thinking after I stop the first expression of

thinking. Thinking is serial. One thought at a time. I can't think about the

thought I am thinking at the moment I am thinking it, only after I have

expressed a particual thoght that I can think about the last thought. It is the

serial aspect of thought that produces the illusion of time passing, instead of

not

existing at all, as is the case.

 

Larry Epston

 

>

>

>

>

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , epston wrote:

 

> L.E: I can only think about thinking after I stop the first

expression of

> thinking. Thinking is serial. One thought at a time. I can't think

about the

> thought I am thinking at the moment I am thinking it, only after I have

> expressed a particual thoght that I can think about the last

thought. It is the

> serial aspect of thought that produces the illusion of time passing,

instead of not

> existing at all, as is the case.

>

> Larry Epston

 

Yes.

 

Thought never really has an object - hence no subject.

 

Nothing rubs up against thought - not even a " previous thought. "

 

Memory processes always appear " now. "

 

Time is the illusory presence of what was in what is, being reflected

upon as an image.

 

The image always being now, the illusion of time is exposed.

 

-- D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

On 5/13/06, dan330033 <dan330033 wrote:

> Nisargadatta , epston wrote:

>

> > L.E: I can only think about thinking after I stop the first

> expression of

> > thinking. Thinking is serial. One thought at a time. I can't think

> about the

> > thought I am thinking at the moment I am thinking it, only after I have

> > expressed a particual thoght that I can think about the last

> thought. It is the

> > serial aspect of thought that produces the illusion of time passing,

> instead of not

> > existing at all, as is the case.

> >

> > Larry Epston

>

> Yes.

>

> Thought never really has an object - hence no subject.

>

> Nothing rubs up against thought - not even a " previous thought. "

>

> Memory processes always appear " now. "

>

> Time is the illusory presence of what was in what is, being reflected

> upon as an image.

>

> The image always being now, the illusion of time is exposed.

>

> -- D.

>

>

 

>>Memory processes always appear " now. "

 

Not when there is real attention.

There is a sparkle, an aliveness to " now " ,

a condition that memory processes never satisfy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <illusyn

wrote:

>

> On 5/13/06, dan330033 <dan330033 wrote:

> > Nisargadatta , epston@ wrote:

> >

> > > L.E: I can only think about thinking after I stop the first

> > expression of

> > > thinking. Thinking is serial. One thought at a time. I can't

think

> > about the

> > > thought I am thinking at the moment I am thinking it, only

after I have

> > > expressed a particual thoght that I can think about the last

> > thought. It is the

> > > serial aspect of thought that produces the illusion of time

passing,

> > instead of not

> > > existing at all, as is the case.

> > >

> > > Larry Epston

> >

> > Yes.

> >

> > Thought never really has an object - hence no subject.

> >

> > Nothing rubs up against thought - not even a " previous thought. "

> >

> > Memory processes always appear " now. "

> >

> > Time is the illusory presence of what was in what is, being

reflected

> > upon as an image.

> >

> > The image always being now, the illusion of time is exposed.

> >

> > -- D.

> >

> >

>

> >>Memory processes always appear " now. "

>

> Not when there is real attention.

> There is a sparkle, an aliveness to " now " ,

> a condition that memory processes never satisfy.

 

Apparently, you believe there is some time outside of now, when a

memory process can be appearing. I assure you, that's not a direct

observation, not what direct awareness shows.

 

- D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <illusyn@>

> wrote:

> >

> > On 5/13/06, dan330033 <dan330033@> wrote:

> > > Nisargadatta , epston@ wrote:

> > >

> > > > L.E: I can only think about thinking after I stop the first

> > > expression of

> > > > thinking. Thinking is serial. One thought at a time. I can't

> think

> > > about the

> > > > thought I am thinking at the moment I am thinking it, only

> after I have

> > > > expressed a particual thoght that I can think about the last

> > > thought. It is the

> > > > serial aspect of thought that produces the illusion of time

> passing,

> > > instead of not

> > > > existing at all, as is the case.

> > > >

> > > > Larry Epston

> > >

> > > Yes.

> > >

> > > Thought never really has an object - hence no subject.

> > >

> > > Nothing rubs up against thought - not even a " previous thought. "

> > >

> > > Memory processes always appear " now. "

> > >

> > > Time is the illusory presence of what was in what is, being

> reflected

> > > upon as an image.

> > >

> > > The image always being now, the illusion of time is exposed.

> > >

> > > -- D.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > >>Memory processes always appear " now. "

> >

> > Not when there is real attention.

> > There is a sparkle, an aliveness to " now " ,

> > a condition that memory processes never satisfy.

>

> Apparently, you believe there is some time outside of now, when a

> memory process can be appearing. I assure you, that's not a direct

> observation, not what direct awareness shows.

>

> - D.

>

 

 

Apparently you believe that there is an entity outside of its beliefs

that you are attempting to edify. I assure you that's not a direct

observation, not what direct obseravtion shows.

 

 

 

toombaru

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain

wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <illusyn@>

> > wrote:

> > >

> > > On 5/13/06, dan330033 <dan330033@> wrote:

> > > > Nisargadatta , epston@ wrote:

> > > >

> > > > > L.E: I can only think about thinking after I stop the first

> > > > expression of

> > > > > thinking. Thinking is serial. One thought at a time. I

can't

> > think

> > > > about the

> > > > > thought I am thinking at the moment I am thinking it, only

> > after I have

> > > > > expressed a particual thoght that I can think about the last

> > > > thought. It is the

> > > > > serial aspect of thought that produces the illusion of time

> > passing,

> > > > instead of not

> > > > > existing at all, as is the case.

> > > > >

> > > > > Larry Epston

> > > >

> > > > Yes.

> > > >

> > > > Thought never really has an object - hence no subject.

> > > >

> > > > Nothing rubs up against thought - not even a " previous

thought. "

> > > >

> > > > Memory processes always appear " now. "

> > > >

> > > > Time is the illusory presence of what was in what is, being

> > reflected

> > > > upon as an image.

> > > >

> > > > The image always being now, the illusion of time is exposed.

> > > >

> > > > -- D.

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > >>Memory processes always appear " now. "

> > >

> > > Not when there is real attention.

> > > There is a sparkle, an aliveness to " now " ,

> > > a condition that memory processes never satisfy.

> >

> > Apparently, you believe there is some time outside of now, when a

> > memory process can be appearing. I assure you, that's not a

direct

> > observation, not what direct awareness shows.

> >

> > - D.

> >

>

>

> Apparently you believe that there is an entity outside of its

beliefs

> that you are attempting to edify. I assure you that's not a direct

> observation, not what direct obseravtion shows.

>

>

>

> toombaru

 

No, I don't believe that.

 

D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@>

> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <illusyn@>

> > > wrote:

> > > >

> > > > On 5/13/06, dan330033 <dan330033@> wrote:

> > > > > Nisargadatta , epston@ wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > > L.E: I can only think about thinking after I stop the first

> > > > > expression of

> > > > > > thinking. Thinking is serial. One thought at a time. I

> can't

> > > think

> > > > > about the

> > > > > > thought I am thinking at the moment I am thinking it, only

> > > after I have

> > > > > > expressed a particual thoght that I can think about the last

> > > > > thought. It is the

> > > > > > serial aspect of thought that produces the illusion of time

> > > passing,

> > > > > instead of not

> > > > > > existing at all, as is the case.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Larry Epston

> > > > >

> > > > > Yes.

> > > > >

> > > > > Thought never really has an object - hence no subject.

> > > > >

> > > > > Nothing rubs up against thought - not even a " previous

> thought. "

> > > > >

> > > > > Memory processes always appear " now. "

> > > > >

> > > > > Time is the illusory presence of what was in what is, being

> > > reflected

> > > > > upon as an image.

> > > > >

> > > > > The image always being now, the illusion of time is exposed.

> > > > >

> > > > > -- D.

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > >>Memory processes always appear " now. "

> > > >

> > > > Not when there is real attention.

> > > > There is a sparkle, an aliveness to " now " ,

> > > > a condition that memory processes never satisfy.

> > >

> > > Apparently, you believe there is some time outside of now, when a

> > > memory process can be appearing. I assure you, that's not a

> direct

> > > observation, not what direct awareness shows.

> > >

> > > - D.

> > >

> >

> >

> > Apparently you believe that there is an entity outside of its

> beliefs

> > that you are attempting to edify. I assure you that's not a direct

> > observation, not what direct obseravtion shows.

> >

> >

> >

> > toombaru

>

> No, I don't believe that.

>

> D.

>

 

 

To whom are you responding?

 

 

toombaru

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain

wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@>

> > wrote:

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@>

wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <illusyn@>

> > > > wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > On 5/13/06, dan330033 <dan330033@> wrote:

> > > > > > Nisargadatta , epston@ wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > L.E: I can only think about thinking after I stop the

first

> > > > > > expression of

> > > > > > > thinking. Thinking is serial. One thought at a time.

I

> > can't

> > > > think

> > > > > > about the

> > > > > > > thought I am thinking at the moment I am thinking it,

only

> > > > after I have

> > > > > > > expressed a particual thoght that I can think about the

last

> > > > > > thought. It is the

> > > > > > > serial aspect of thought that produces the illusion of

time

> > > > passing,

> > > > > > instead of not

> > > > > > > existing at all, as is the case.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Larry Epston

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Yes.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Thought never really has an object - hence no subject.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Nothing rubs up against thought - not even a " previous

> > thought. "

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Memory processes always appear " now. "

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Time is the illusory presence of what was in what is,

being

> > > > reflected

> > > > > > upon as an image.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > The image always being now, the illusion of time is

exposed.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > -- D.

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > >>Memory processes always appear " now. "

> > > > >

> > > > > Not when there is real attention.

> > > > > There is a sparkle, an aliveness to " now " ,

> > > > > a condition that memory processes never satisfy.

> > > >

> > > > Apparently, you believe there is some time outside of now,

when a

> > > > memory process can be appearing. I assure you, that's not a

> > direct

> > > > observation, not what direct awareness shows.

> > > >

> > > > - D.

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Apparently you believe that there is an entity outside of its

> > beliefs

> > > that you are attempting to edify. I assure you that's not a

direct

> > > observation, not what direct obseravtion shows.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > toombaru

> >

> > No, I don't believe that.

> >

> > D.

> >

>

>

> To whom are you responding?

>

>

> toombaru

 

Bobby Fisher.

 

- D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...