Guest guest Posted June 21, 2007 Report Share Posted June 21, 2007 Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Where do thoughts come from? > > > > Are they electrochemical mis/firings of/from the brain like > scientists > > > > say? > > > > Are they ancient memories storied in the DNA? > > > > > > > > Are thoughts things? > > > > And which thoughts are not things thinking in concepts such as > > > > thoughts? > > > > > > > > Are you the thinker? Are you the thought that thinks thinker? > > > > > > > > Is there such a thing as a thought? And when isn't a thought a > > thought? > > > > > > > > How many thoughts can be thought of at one time? Is there such a > > > > thing as time? > > > > > > > > Hmm. Sounds like I am a thought that thinks in a linear thought > frame > > > > called now. > > > > > > > > ? > > > > > > > > > > thoughts are not things. > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > Things are not things. > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > for some things... > > like if it was something you were thinking... > > > Bill > To me Bill..... " thought " appears more like a river.......sometimes placid....sometimes torrential. I can only follow its natural course.....it meanders through meadows and precipitous canyons....always and only emptying out into the ocean of its origin. It looks like thought can go back and think about what appears to be a previous thought. .....but that is merely an new thought...emerging within the thought-stream. " Thought " cannot separate itself into an observer part and an observed part. " Thought " is the nane that the thought-stream has given the flowing conceptional-reactional stimuli response system that emerges within the frontal cortex. By giving itself a name......it appears to be a noun and not and adjective. If it were a noun......it could be described and analyzed.....and an adjective.....it cannot be approached........because......well.......because it is whats thinking. (reacting). What do you think? :-) PS: The effects of our time together linger as a sweet after taste. a bow toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 21, 2007 Report Share Posted June 21, 2007 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Where do thoughts come from? > > > > > Are they electrochemical mis/firings of/from the brain like > > scientists > > > > > say? > > > > > Are they ancient memories storied in the DNA? > > > > > > > > > > Are thoughts things? > > > > > And which thoughts are not things thinking in concepts such as > > > > > thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > Are you the thinker? Are you the thought that thinks thinker? > > > > > > > > > > Is there such a thing as a thought? And when isn't a thought a > > > thought? > > > > > > > > > > How many thoughts can be thought of at one time? Is there such a > > > > > thing as time? > > > > > > > > > > Hmm. Sounds like I am a thought that thinks in a linear thought > > frame > > > > > called now. > > > > > > > > > > ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > thoughts are not things. > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Things are not things. > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > for some things... > > > > like if it was something you were thinking... > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > To me Bill..... " thought " appears more like a river.......sometimes > placid....sometimes torrential. > > I can only follow its natural course.....it meanders through meadows > and precipitous canyons....always and only emptying out into the ocean > of its origin. > > It looks like thought can go back and think about what appears to be a > previous thought. > > ....but that is merely an new thought...emerging within the > thought-stream. > > " Thought " cannot separate itself into an observer part and an observed > part. > > " Thought " is the nane that the thought-stream has given the flowing > conceptional-reactional stimuli response system that emerges within > the frontal cortex. > > By giving itself a name......it appears to be a noun and not and > adjective. > > If it were a noun......it could be described and analyzed.....and an > adjective.....it cannot be > approached........because......well.......because it is whats > thinking. (reacting). > > > > What do you think? > > > :-) > > > PS: > > The effects of our time together linger as a sweet after taste. > > > > > a bow > > > > > toombaru the deal is boys...this is all talk. just and only talk. enlightenment is like credit. you can't get it unless you already have it. you can't get a loan unless you don't need the money. enlightenment is not realized until you already are there. money talks bullshit walks. boys and girls talk.. enlightenment walks... it walks away far in the distance until all the talk stops. when there..there is no need of talk. there is nothing else that needs to be or can be talked about. all of your foolish attempts will evaporate when you are with baba. for then: enlightenment....the baba...knowledge through identity...self/Self ...are One, without second. only stern rebukes are then issued.. for the good of all seekers. if smacked often and enough..the lost are found. this is the only Way. 'you' all must die to yourselves and your ideas. until you have joined as One with the baba Here.. enjoy the word games. it's entertainment called 'mind'. but it's NOT the Real Deal. I Love All My Children. and like a loving father the baba smites the children of Error... for their own Good. ...even though there is no such thing. ASTONISHING! at least to those who do not Understand. ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 21, 2007 Report Share Posted June 21, 2007 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Where do thoughts come from? > > > > > Are they electrochemical mis/firings of/from the brain like > > scientists > > > > > say? > > > > > Are they ancient memories storied in the DNA? > > > > > > > > > > Are thoughts things? > > > > > And which thoughts are not things thinking in concepts such as > > > > > thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > Are you the thinker? Are you the thought that thinks thinker? > > > > > > > > > > Is there such a thing as a thought? And when isn't a thought a > > > thought? > > > > > > > > > > How many thoughts can be thought of at one time? Is there such a > > > > > thing as time? > > > > > > > > > > Hmm. Sounds like I am a thought that thinks in a linear thought > > frame > > > > > called now. > > > > > > > > > > ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > thoughts are not things. > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Things are not things. > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > for some things... > > > > like if it was something you were thinking... > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > To me Bill..... " thought " appears more like a river.......sometimes > placid....sometimes torrential. > > I can only follow its natural course.....it meanders through meadows > and precipitous canyons....always and only emptying out into the ocean > of its origin. > > It looks like thought can go back and think about what appears to be a > previous thought. > > ....but that is merely an new thought...emerging within the > thought-stream. > > " Thought " cannot separate itself into an observer part and an observed > part. > > " Thought " is the nane that the thought-stream has given the flowing > conceptional-reactional stimuli response system that emerges within > the frontal cortex. > > By giving itself a name......it appears to be a noun and not and > adjective. > > If it were a noun......it could be described and analyzed.....and an > adjective.....it cannot be > approached........because......well.......because it is whats > thinking. (reacting). > > > > What do you think? Your choice of words in that question... ) For me it is much the same... your description works very well. I incline to speak of thought/thinking as a process, and like you say cannot really refer back to itself, even if pretends to. So I incline to think of thought as an intransitive verb (no direct object). And yes, a flow, a stream... but not isolated from awareness... not an action by a " me " ... it is just consciousness unfolding, all mixed in with the sights, sounds, the many sensations of experience... I might even say it is a particular glance in the Eye of Love > > > :-) > > > PS: > > The effects of our time together linger as a sweet after taste. > Here too... coursing the depths of being in shared state rare blessing > > > a bow > a bow > > > toombaru > Bill PS: we must do that again... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 21, 2007 Report Share Posted June 21, 2007 Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Where do thoughts come from? > > > > > > Are they electrochemical mis/firings of/from the brain like > > > scientists > > > > > > say? > > > > > > Are they ancient memories storied in the DNA? > > > > > > > > > > > > Are thoughts things? > > > > > > And which thoughts are not things thinking in concepts such as > > > > > > thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > > > Are you the thinker? Are you the thought that thinks thinker? > > > > > > > > > > > > Is there such a thing as a thought? And when isn't a thought a > > > > thought? > > > > > > > > > > > > How many thoughts can be thought of at one time? Is there > such a > > > > > > thing as time? > > > > > > > > > > > > Hmm. Sounds like I am a thought that thinks in a linear thought > > > frame > > > > > > called now. > > > > > > > > > > > > ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thoughts are not things. > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Things are not things. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > for some things... > > > > > > like if it was something you were thinking... > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > To me Bill..... " thought " appears more like a river.......sometimes > > placid....sometimes torrential. > > > > I can only follow its natural course.....it meanders through meadows > > and precipitous canyons....always and only emptying out into the ocean > > of its origin. > > > > It looks like thought can go back and think about what appears to be a > > previous thought. > > > > ....but that is merely an new thought...emerging within the > > thought-stream. > > > > " Thought " cannot separate itself into an observer part and an observed > > part. > > > > " Thought " is the nane that the thought-stream has given the flowing > > conceptional-reactional stimuli response system that emerges within > > the frontal cortex. > > > > By giving itself a name......it appears to be a noun and not and > > adjective. > > > > If it were a noun......it could be described and analyzed.....and an > > adjective.....it cannot be > > approached........because......well.......because it is whats > > thinking. (reacting). > > > > > > > > What do you think? > > Your choice of words in that question... ) > > For me it is much the same... your description works very > well. I incline to speak of thought/thinking as a process, > and like you say cannot really refer back to itself, even > if pretends to. So I incline to think of thought as an > intransitive verb (no direct object). > > And yes, a flow, a stream... > > but not isolated from awareness... not an action by a " me " ... > it is just consciousness unfolding, all mixed in with the > sights, sounds, the many sensations of experience... Yes.....it seems to be the means by which manifestation is able to get a peek up its own dress. By naming.....consciousness conceptually freezes segments within the flowingnesss long enough to to get impressions of its personal reality....which is not other than the residue of the naming process. > > I might even say > it is a particular glance > in the Eye of Love > > Yes.........something unspeakable keeps peeking through the dream. Something familiar and warm. Something that could only be hinted at by the word " love " . > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > PS: > > > > The effects of our time together linger as a sweet after taste. > > > > Here too... coursing the depths of being > in shared state > rare blessing > > > > > > > a bow > > > > a bow > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > Bill > > PS: we must do that again... > That would be grand. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 21, 2007 Report Share Posted June 21, 2007 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Where do thoughts come from? > > > > > > > Are they electrochemical mis/firings of/from the brain like > > > > scientists > > > > > > > say? > > > > > > > Are they ancient memories storied in the DNA? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Are thoughts things? > > > > > > > And which thoughts are not things thinking in concepts > such as > > > > > > > thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Are you the thinker? Are you the thought that thinks thinker? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is there such a thing as a thought? And when isn't a > thought a > > > > > thought? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How many thoughts can be thought of at one time? Is there > > such a > > > > > > > thing as time? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hmm. Sounds like I am a thought that thinks in a linear > thought > > > > frame > > > > > > > called now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thoughts are not things. > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Things are not things. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > > > > for some things... > > > > > > > > like if it was something you were thinking... > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To me Bill..... " thought " appears more like a river.......sometimes > > > placid....sometimes torrential. > > > > > > I can only follow its natural course.....it meanders through meadows > > > and precipitous canyons....always and only emptying out into the ocean > > > of its origin. > > > > > > It looks like thought can go back and think about what appears to be a > > > previous thought. > > > > > > ....but that is merely an new thought...emerging within the > > > thought-stream. > > > > > > " Thought " cannot separate itself into an observer part and an observed > > > part. > > > > > > " Thought " is the nane that the thought-stream has given the flowing > > > conceptional-reactional stimuli response system that emerges within > > > the frontal cortex. > > > > > > By giving itself a name......it appears to be a noun and not and > > > adjective. > > > > > > If it were a noun......it could be described and analyzed.....and an > > > adjective.....it cannot be > > > approached........because......well.......because it is whats > > > thinking. (reacting). > > > > > > > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > Your choice of words in that question... ) > > > > For me it is much the same... your description works very > > well. I incline to speak of thought/thinking as a process, > > and like you say cannot really refer back to itself, even > > if pretends to. So I incline to think of thought as an > > intransitive verb (no direct object). > > > > And yes, a flow, a stream... > > > > but not isolated from awareness... not an action by a " me " ... > > it is just consciousness unfolding, all mixed in with the > > sights, sounds, the many sensations of experience... > > > > > Yes.....it seems to be the means by which manifestation is able to get > a peek up its own dress. > > By naming.....consciousness conceptually freezes segments within the > flowingnesss long enough to to get impressions of its personal > reality....which is not other than the residue of the naming process. > > > > > I might even say > > it is a particular glance > > in the Eye of Love > > > > > > > > > Yes.........something unspeakable keeps peeking through the dream. > > Something familiar and warm. > > > Something that could only be hinted at by the word " love " . > > > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > > PS: > > > > > > The effects of our time together linger as a sweet after taste. > > > > > > > Here too... coursing the depths of being > > in shared state > > rare blessing > > > > > > > > > > > a bow > > > > > > > a bow > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > Bill > > > > PS: we must do that again... > > > > > > > That would be grand. > > > > toombaru it's a wonder how reactive biochemical mechanisms have evolved into such inward thinking/speaking complexes. a biomass baloney fest. it is in fact.......grand. ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 21, 2007 Report Share Posted June 21, 2007 > it's a wonder how reactive biochemical mechanisms have evolved into > such inward thinking/speaking complexes. > > a biomass baloney fest. > > it is in fact.......grand. > > .b b.b. > Bobby, Why don't you join us? We have eternity......to be the emptiness.....and only a little time left to enjoy each other's company. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 21, 2007 Report Share Posted June 21, 2007 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > > > it's a wonder how reactive biochemical mechanisms have evolved into > > such inward thinking/speaking complexes. > > > > a biomass baloney fest. > > > > it is in fact.......grand. > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > Bobby, > > > Why don't you join us? > > > We have eternity......to be the emptiness.....and only a little time > left to enjoy each other's company. > > > > > > toombaru eternity is not other than this. we all are together already smack dab in the middle of it. it cannot be otherwise. the Company of Companions is not an eternal 'later'.. it's now and for always and forever. i am never for a nano-moment apart from you. and i bless you as i am blessed by you. We are not other than " What Is'. This cannot be doubted in the Certainty and Identity of Knowledge. but it sure as hell is not easily 'talked' about. you got to be there..or not.. in the Beginnings and Endings and Neverwas it's all the same. it's a long row to hoe..but " It Will Be Done " ..and even Now IS. we are not joined by coffee or conversation.. we are not joined at the hips.. we are not. but THAT IS. and All are THAT. ..b Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 21, 2007 Report Share Posted June 21, 2007 Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > it's a wonder how reactive biochemical mechanisms have evolved into > > > such inward thinking/speaking complexes. > > > > > > a biomass baloney fest. > > > > > > it is in fact.......grand. > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bobby, > > > > > > Why don't you join us? > > > > > > We have eternity......to be the emptiness.....and only a little time > > left to enjoy each other's company. > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > eternity is not other than this. > > we all are together already smack dab in the middle of it. > > it cannot be otherwise. > > the Company of Companions is not an eternal 'later'.. > > it's now and for always and forever. > > i am never for a nano-moment apart from you. > > and i bless you as i am blessed by you. > > We are not other than " What Is'. > > This cannot be doubted in the Certainty and Identity of Knowledge. > > but it sure as hell is not easily 'talked' about. > > you got to be there..or not.. > > in the Beginnings and Endings and Neverwas it's all the same. > > it's a long row to hoe..but " It Will Be Done " ..and even Now IS. > > we are not joined by coffee or conversation.. > > we are not joined at the hips.. > > we are not. > > but THAT IS. > > and All are THAT. > > .b > So.............how about that scone? t. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 21, 2007 Report Share Posted June 21, 2007 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > it's a wonder how reactive biochemical mechanisms have evolved into > > > > such inward thinking/speaking complexes. > > > > > > > > a biomass baloney fest. > > > > > > > > it is in fact.......grand. > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bobby, > > > > > > > > > Why don't you join us? > > > > > > > > > We have eternity......to be the emptiness.....and only a little time > > > left to enjoy each other's company. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > eternity is not other than this. > > > > we all are together already smack dab in the middle of it. > > > > it cannot be otherwise. > > > > the Company of Companions is not an eternal 'later'.. > > > > it's now and for always and forever. > > > > i am never for a nano-moment apart from you. > > > > and i bless you as i am blessed by you. > > > > We are not other than " What Is'. > > > > This cannot be doubted in the Certainty and Identity of Knowledge. > > > > but it sure as hell is not easily 'talked' about. > > > > you got to be there..or not.. > > > > in the Beginnings and Endings and Neverwas it's all the same. > > > > it's a long row to hoe..but " It Will Be Done " ..and even Now IS. > > > > we are not joined by coffee or conversation.. > > > > we are not joined at the hips.. > > > > we are not. > > > > but THAT IS. > > > > and All are THAT. > > > > .b > So.............how about that scone? > > > > > t. THAT scone? you bet! We are THAT. ..b b.b 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.