Guest guest Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 Nisargadatta , " josesiem " <josesiem> wrote: > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > Look at something in the room where you are, and while looking at > > this object try to think at the same time. Thought is not all there > > is. Thought is just a process being experienced. > > > Yes, I know. And nothing can be said about it. > > > > > > There is that which can be measured, for example a thoughts can be > > measured against a scale of bad-neutral-good thought. > > Not really. Any measurement would itself be another thought. No > thoughts ever meet or connect. A thought can be measured in many ways. For example if the thought is a word construct, then we can count the number of letters in that thought. If the thought is about the future we can estimate the period of time from the present moment to that point in the future the thought is about. Even an abstract thought can be measured by looking at how much time it requres for the thought to pass through awareness. We can even measure the electro-chemical patterns created in the brain and how they correlate to what we are thinking. /AL > > > > > > > I see awareness as the pure observer that cannot be measured. > > Cool. > > Joe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > Nisargadatta , " josesiem " <josesiem> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > Look at something in the room where you are, and while looking at > > > this object try to think at the same time. Thought is not all > there > > > is. Thought is just a process being experienced. > > > > > > Yes, I know. And nothing can be said about it. > > > > > > > > > > There is that which can be measured, for example a thoughts can > be > > > measured against a scale of bad-neutral-good thought. > > > > Not really. Any measurement would itself be another thought. No > > thoughts ever meet or connect. > > A thought can be measured in many ways. For example if the thought is > a word construct, then we can count the number of letters in that > thought. If the thought is about the future we can estimate the > period of time from the present moment to that point in the future > the thought is about. Even an abstract thought can be measured by > looking at how much time it requres for the thought to pass through > awareness. We can even measure the electro-chemical patterns created > in the brain and how they correlate to what we are thinking. > > /AL > But a new thought arises each split second. See model below for illustration: ---> red ---> remembering thought of red ----> now i will measure thought of red ----> the thought of red lasts 2 seconds ---> See how each thought is new? And no thought touches another thought. So you're not measuring anything! The measurement itself is its own thought. Within the thought of measurement is contained teh apparent thought-content of a previous thought. But that previous thought is no longer there. So, you cannot measure a thought, unless you want to include many thoughts under the heading of " one thought " Thoughtfully, Joe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 Nisargadatta , " josesiem " <josesiem> wrote: > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " josesiem " <josesiem> > wrote: > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > Look at something in the room where you are, and while looking > at > > > > this object try to think at the same time. Thought is not all > > there > > > > is. Thought is just a process being experienced. > > > > > > > > > Yes, I know. And nothing can be said about it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is that which can be measured, for example a thoughts can > > be > > > > measured against a scale of bad-neutral-good thought. > > > > > > Not really. Any measurement would itself be another thought. No > > > thoughts ever meet or connect. > > > > A thought can be measured in many ways. For example if the thought > is > > a word construct, then we can count the number of letters in that > > thought. If the thought is about the future we can estimate the > > period of time from the present moment to that point in the future > > the thought is about. Even an abstract thought can be measured by > > looking at how much time it requres for the thought to pass through > > awareness. We can even measure the electro-chemical patterns > created > > in the brain and how they correlate to what we are thinking. > > > > /AL > > > > But a new thought arises each split second. See model below for > illustration: > > ---> red ---> remembering thought of red ----> now i will measure > thought of red ----> the thought of red lasts 2 seconds ---> > > See how each thought is new? And no thought touches another thought. > So you're not measuring anything! The measurement itself is its own > thought. Within the thought of measurement is contained teh apparent > thought-content of a previous thought. But that previous thought is > no longer there. So, you cannot measure a thought, unless you want to > include many thoughts under the heading of " one thought " > > Thoughtfully, > Joe The thought is still there as a memory. So the memory can be measured. We can also measure thoughts in real time by measuring the electro-magnetic patterns generated in the brain. There has been successful experiments done using the measurement of electro-magnetic thought patterns, for example to control a weapon aiming device in fighter aircrafts. If you measure a potato, you have only a past measurement of the potato. Just like thoughts, the potato is changing all the time. The potato and the thoughts generated in the brain are of the same changing quantum state. Pure awareness, the pure observer " in " us, cannot be measured. /AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <plexus@a...> wrote: > > Try this: Think about something, and then notice that you know that > > you are thinking about something. This is awareness of the thought > > process itself. > > > > /AL > > Or: > " Try this: Think about something, and then notice that > you are *trying* something. This is awareness of the trying process > itself. " > > Or: > Type a word, then notice that you are typing something. This is > awareness of the typing process itself. > > Or: > Type a word, then notice that you are noticing something. This is > awareness of the noticing process itself. > > Can you notice that you are noticing something? > > Bill I like these suggestions, Bill. Excellent. Hey, I've got one. Think this. Now, think this. Now, think this. Pretty cool, huh? -- Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > " Truth will not be found in any quote. " -- Theo Sauros > > But " Truth will not be found in any quote. " is itself a quote, so is > this statement not true? Then, if this statement is not the truth, > maybe the truth can be found in a quote? ;-) > > /AL It's more like this, Anders: As the quote is being read, nanosecond by nanosecond as you're reading it, there is no quote, no statement of any kind. *Here* is the truth. It is just *this* way, as is. It has nothing to do with anything being read. It already always is *so* is *thus* and has no dependence whatsoever on any quote or statement, or how that is construed. And yet, it is only because of *this as is* that there is the very experience of " something being read. " -- Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > The regress stops when one realizes that thoughts are that which is > being observed, not the observer itself. > > /AL You're still involved in the regress of the one who realizes that one has realized what one has realized who has realized that one has realized ... -- Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > Pretending to be an unmoving permanent consciousness is a thought and > that is not timeless awareness. One can see one's whole intellect as > a thinking/feeling process. The awareness of this process as a > process could lead to liberation. > > /AL Yes, truth is not a process. Hence, *this* is timeless, and not an activity. All processes are understood *here* as the temporally-based interconnections of thought-memory-sensation-action. Thus, *here* is not of thought, memory, sensation, or activity. Nor is it the opposite of these, that is, *this* is not to lack thought or the ability to think, to be unable to remember anything, to not sense anything, to avoid activity. The opposite of a process, is just another process. For example, the process of moving, and the process of remaining still and observing movements, are both processes. -- Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 24, 2004 Report Share Posted June 24, 2004 Hey, I've got one. Think this. Now, think this. Now, think this. Pretty cool, huh? >>>>>>>>>>> Yeah. I hadn't thought of that. Bill - dan330033 Nisargadatta Wednesday, June 23, 2004 7:14 PM Re: Anders. What is timeless being? Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <plexus@a...> wrote: > > Try this: Think about something, and then notice that you know that > > you are thinking about something. This is awareness of the thought > > process itself. > > > > /AL > > Or: > " Try this: Think about something, and then notice that > you are *trying* something. This is awareness of the trying process > itself. " > > Or: > Type a word, then notice that you are typing something. This is > awareness of the typing process itself. > > Or: > Type a word, then notice that you are noticing something. This is > awareness of the noticing process itself. > > Can you notice that you are noticing something? > > Bill I like these suggestions, Bill. Excellent. Hey, I've got one. Think this. Now, think this. Now, think this. Pretty cool, huh? -- Dan ** If you do not wish to receive individual emails, to change your subscription, sign in with your ID and go to Edit My Groups: /mygroups?edit=1 Under the Message Delivery option, choose " No Email " for the Nisargadatta group and click on Save Changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 24, 2004 Report Share Posted June 24, 2004 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > The regress stops when one realizes that thoughts are that which is > being observed, not the observer itself. > > /AL You're still involved in the regress of the one who realizes that one has realized what one has realized who has realized that one has realized ... -- Dan >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, so it seems. This kind of topic reminds me of the story from my childhood of " Little Black Sambo " . Little Black Sambo was running from a tiger and was running around a palm tree with the tiger right behind him. Sambo jumped out of the whirling circle-chase and the tiger didn't notice, continuing to chase himself in effect. The tiger whirled and whirled around until he changed into butter. So could say the regression ends when the tiger changes into butter. I see such " regressions " as leading to a " popping of the bubble " . That is the nature of inquiry/koan in general. It is a way of inducing the tiger to give up the chase, not by *convincing* the tiger, but by *melting* the tiger into the shimmering Now. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 26, 2004 Report Share Posted June 26, 2004 Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <plexus@a...> wrote: > Hey, I've got one. > > Think this. > > Now, think this. > > Now, think this. > > Pretty cool, huh? > >>>>>>>>>>> > Yeah. > I hadn't thought of that. > > Bill LOL! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > " Truth will not be found in any quote. " -- Theo Sauros > > > > But " Truth will not be found in any quote. " is itself a quote, so > is > > this statement not true? Then, if this statement is not the truth, > > maybe the truth can be found in a quote? ;-) > > > > /AL > > It's more like this, Anders: > > As the quote is being read, nanosecond by nanosecond > as you're reading it, there is no quote, no statement > of any kind. > > *Here* is the truth. > > It is just *this* way, as is. > > It has nothing to do with anything being read. > > It already always is *so* is *thus* and has no > dependence whatsoever on any quote or statement, > or how that is construed. > > And yet, it is only because of *this as is* that > there is the very experience of " something being > read. " > > -- Dan Yes. I wonder if it is possible to change what is. If I have free will I can change what is! So the truth then depends on what I decide. For example I can take the red pill or the blue pill and depending on my choice the truth as being *this as is* can be altered. Many mystics say that there is nobody making any choices. But I am not sure about that. Their claim seems logical since thoughts arise in awareness only after they have been " created " , but I cannot say I know this for sure. /AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > The regress stops when one realizes that thoughts are that which is > > being observed, not the observer itself. > > > > /AL > > You're still involved in the regress of the one who realizes > that one has realized what one has realized who has realized > that one has realized ... > > -- Dan That's why a jump into a higher state of being is needed or one will be stuck in the cage of the intellect forever. /AL 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.