Unknown & Impenetrable/Lewis

[Guest guest]

> > L-c3: It was not an " unknown darkness " just a " darkness " or an

> > impenetrable darkness or recently, a " pellucid darkness " in this

> > appearance (commonly called my body/mind complex) where it cannot

> be

> > seen or understood how things emerged, be they thoughts, language,

> > behavior or whatever.

> >

> P-c4: Lewis, what's the difference between impenetrable and unknown,

> if you cannot understand how it works, or what it is? Lewis, you

> did not answer my question, is it outside words? Can it be a product

> of words and produce words at the same time? A Brief answer, please.

>

 

L-c4: In my usage, unknown means not known, not apprehended and

impenetrable means inaccessible as to knowledge or reason. The darkness

is not unknown, it is known as I can experience it and then label

define...etc. to a degree and yet it is impenetrable in that it is

inaccesible to to the understanding as to how it precisely works, how

things emerge, like speech and behavior. I have given this example many

times. You can experience speech production and yet cannot explain how

it occurs. The how is forever hidden from understanding yet it in doing

speech the sensation of its emergence is known to a degree as it is

identified and labeled metaphorically.

 

 

 

> >

> P-c3: So there it is above, Lewis, in your own words. It's a

> feeling of

> dynamic sameness in the throat, it's not ineffable, and you point

> to it with words. Below you mention attendant perceptions,

> sensations,

> images, emotions which attend words. So, if they attend

> words they must be outside words.

 

Lewis: No, that is not pointing for me, that is telling it as I can and

that is all there is. From your perspective it is pointing because you

did not undergo it. You are separating it all out trying to understand.

My words are my experience - as I tell it - and construct it - from

memory - in the moment - don't you see? What is it pointing to then?

It is an abstraction made from selected memory fragments in images,

thoughts, sensations, perceptions, imagination intellection all

happpening at once. You see me telling you about my experience as it

was [not is.] There is " no thing " more than what I create of it in the

moment and it refers only to those memory fragments and other fragments

drawn from, and put together into an abstraction called experience.

What I tell you is all there is for me at the moment. There is no

pointing from my perspective. The words that flow out are inseparable

with all the rest of it. And all of those things (sensations etc are

words) arise together and then parsed out in the talking or telling of

it. They are inseparable in the making. See the permeable walls thread

in Nisargadatta. Or the Sapir-Whorf Theory for some notion of how it

arises together. Or simply watch carefully how you selectively create

experience from memory fragments. Without memory you could not do it.