|
Post by jasonlynch on Jan 22, 2013 10:03:20 GMT -8
Autonomy is an idea I use to talk about a psychological structure in which the thinking mind is not in conflict with itself. In the absence of internal unresolved conflicts, the tendency for the mind to want to think and not think along the same lines at the same time, comes to an end, which would be a welcome ending for most peeps one would think.
Have you ever had the experience of wanting to stop your thought processes? Of thinking you don't want to be thinking, in the process of thinking itself? Its a common tendency in most humans, to think that they don't want to be thinking from time to time. If we take a step back, we can see how absurd this tendency is. If you're thinking, its because you want to be thinking, and not because there's some mind which isn't you doing it. The question is, are we conscious of what's driving it? And the answer is always no. If we were conscious of what's driving it then the unconscious tendency wouldn't be happening. Its not even possible to want to think and not think at the same time. You think, and then imagine you don't want to be thinking, which is what we sometimes call a delusion. As we 'become conscious' that we aren't actually driving our thought stream, we can begin to understand how and why it moves in certain ways.
Becoming conscious is like untying your mind so you can see that you're free. If you're scared to feel a certain way, and you aren't conscious that you're scared, you will unconsciously avoid situations which you think might make you feel that way. And when you desire to be in that situation at the same time, you have a recipe for a split mind. By becoming conscious of the unconscious fears, you lose the banana split and are free to eat your hot fudge sundae. Yum yum!
|
|
|
Post by humphrey on Jan 22, 2013 11:04:35 GMT -8
Usually when I'm thinking that I'd like not to be thinking, I'd rather be sleeping. Tossing and turning, jacked up on caffeine. There's an energy there that is spinning thoughts like a top. If the energy was there and there was 'less inclination' to think, maybe due to missing unconscious tendencies, would there just be jacked up energy? Of course, probably with more consciousness I wouldn't be getting jacked in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by jasonlynch on Jan 22, 2013 11:57:10 GMT -8
Usually when I'm thinking that I'd like not to be thinking, I'd rather be sleeping. Tossing and turning, jacked up on caffeine. There's an energy there that is spinning thoughts like a top. If the energy was there and there was 'less inclination' to think, maybe due to missing unconscious tendencies, would there just be jacked up energy? Of course, probably with more consciousness I wouldn't be getting jacked in the first place. Getting high to avoid thinking and feeling a certain way, when on a certain level, you want to think and feel that way, is an indication of an already existing mind split. If your mind truly wants to write a program for better sleep, it will write it. And that may very well involve cutting back on the caffeine. Right now, that's just not what you want. In terms of the energy spinning thoughts like a top and the 'inclination to think': I would say harboring conflicts internally can manifest as chaos on the surface level of mind. The distortion from what isn't resolved is the lens through which consciousness creates through. The personal experience is the source of the distortion. Ironically, you can't find the 'actual person' at the source of that experience. When what is conscious of mind engages mind, there is a constriction of focus or attention into the thought stream. Consciousness creates and perceives thought simultaneoulsy, and the idea that what is created needs to, or could, stop itself, is silly. The thought processes which are undesirable, are undesirable only to an idea which represents the source of those thought processes. Ideas don't have anything to worry about. They're just ideas. Back to your question, staying unconscious takes a lot of energy and manifests in the experience in all sorts of ways. In the absence of exerting energy to remain unconscious, you are free from the idea that there was someone exerting something in the first place, which is why we say that life becomes effortless when we aren't sleeping at the wheel. Energy is still expended, but never wasted. The idea that thoughts can battle thoughts is a misconception, yet dynamically, something that seemingly happens. Being fully conscious is the absence of that seeming happening.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 22, 2013 17:26:23 GMT -8
Usually when I'm thinking that I'd like not to be thinking, I'd rather be sleeping. Tossing and turning, jacked up on caffeine. There's an energy there that is spinning thoughts like a top. If the energy was there and there was 'less inclination' to think, maybe due to missing unconscious tendencies, would there just be jacked up energy? Of course, probably with more consciousness I wouldn't be getting jacked in the first place. The 'jacked up' issue is interesting, maybe. What makes it seem jacked up is really the rapid pace of the thoughts themselves. In a hyper state, (when not trying to sleep) these thoughts usually lead to all sorts of physical activity too. It's possible to be 'jacked up' and have no thoughts at all. This is a state of heightened alertness, or we could say attentiveness, like a cat watching a mouse hole. We can see that the cat is not physically hyper, and we can at least imagine that it is intensely alert and focused on the the hole. Not thinking about how good the mouse will taste, or how long it might have to wait, or wondering if the kitty litter has been changed yet. There is just a single pointed, empty, alert attentiveness, and for a cat this makes it possible to react viscerally at lightning speed. For a human, it may be possible to notice that which is noticing. This empty, alert attention is not the least bit common for humans. When there is a space formed for attention, the strong tendency is to fill it with thoughts, and so I don't recommend 'jacking it up', but I also don't recommend putting mind into a trance state as often happens with meditation. In any case, high alertness does not equal spinning thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 22, 2013 17:59:01 GMT -8
Autonomy is an idea I use to talk about a psychological structure in which the thinking mind is not in conflict with itself. In the absence of internal unresolved conflicts, the tendency for the mind to want to think and not think along the same lines at the same time, comes to an end, which would be a welcome ending for most peeps one would think. Have you ever had the experience of wanting to stop your thought processes? Of thinking you don't want to be thinking, in the process of thinking itself? Its a common tendency in most humans, to think that they don't want to be thinking from time to time. If we take a step back, we can see how absurd this tendency is. If you're thinking, its because you want to be thinking, and not because there's some mind which isn't you doing it. The question is, are we conscious of what's driving it? And the answer is always no. If we were conscious of what's driving it then the unconscious tendency wouldn't be happening. Its not even possible to want to think and not think at the same time. You think, and then imagine you don't want to be thinking, which is what we sometimes call a delusion. As we 'become conscious' that we aren't actually driving our thought stream, we can begin to understand how and why it moves in certain ways. Becoming conscious is like untying your mind so you can see that you're free. If you're scared to feel a certain way, and you aren't conscious that you're scared, you will unconsciously avoid situations which you think might make you feel that way. And when you desire to be in that situation at the same time, you have a recipe for a split mind. By becoming conscious of the unconscious fears, you lose the banana split and are free to eat your hot fudge sundae. Yum yum! Good stuff. The reason the split mind occurs is that there is the belief that there is a person forming his own thoughts consciously, and that this person can therefore stop thinking, or at least should be able to. So it begins innocently enough with the idea to think good thoughts or stop thinking or whatever. Since it's not actually true that there is conscious control, it doesn't actually work. What it amounts to is a control pattern overlaid onto the existing pattern of thought, which does influence the thoughts, but not to the extent intended since the control pattern is just added. Still, the conclusion might be that the control worked a little, and so more control may be applied. This is an illusion and there was never any control involved. The thought to control thoughts did not originate from a supposed controller, but rather from the same place the rest of the thoughts came from; the past conditioning of beliefs, fears and desires. At this point, there is the belief in a controller, and some other thoughts that need to be controlled. What started out as one apparent person wanting to simply choose his thoughts has now become two apparent thought sources in conflict. Nobody starts out thinking that they are two, but the false idea of control leads to the erroneous conclusion that the failure to control must be the result of there being a mind, and then a person trying to control mind. This battle is not only fruitless, but also an additional source of struggle.
|
|
|
Post by jasonlynch on Jan 22, 2013 22:40:30 GMT -8
Autonomy is an idea I use to talk about a psychological structure in which the thinking mind is not in conflict with itself. In the absence of internal unresolved conflicts, the tendency for the mind to want to think and not think along the same lines at the same time, comes to an end, which would be a welcome ending for most peeps one would think. Have you ever had the experience of wanting to stop your thought processes? Of thinking you don't want to be thinking, in the process of thinking itself? Its a common tendency in most humans, to think that they don't want to be thinking from time to time. If we take a step back, we can see how absurd this tendency is. If you're thinking, its because you want to be thinking, and not because there's some mind which isn't you doing it. The question is, are we conscious of what's driving it? And the answer is always no. If we were conscious of what's driving it then the unconscious tendency wouldn't be happening. Its not even possible to want to think and not think at the same time. You think, and then imagine you don't want to be thinking, which is what we sometimes call a delusion. As we 'become conscious' that we aren't actually driving our thought stream, we can begin to understand how and why it moves in certain ways. Becoming conscious is like untying your mind so you can see that you're free. If you're scared to feel a certain way, and you aren't conscious that you're scared, you will unconsciously avoid situations which you think might make you feel that way. And when you desire to be in that situation at the same time, you have a recipe for a split mind. By becoming conscious of the unconscious fears, you lose the banana split and are free to eat your hot fudge sundae. Yum yum! Good stuff. The reason the split mind occurs is that there is the belief that there is a person forming his own thoughts consciously, and that this person can therefore stop thinking, or at least should be able to. So it begins innocently enough with the idea to think good thoughts or stop thinking or whatever. Since it's not actually true that there is conscious control, it doesn't actually work. What it amounts to is a control pattern overlaid onto the existing pattern of thought, which does influence the thoughts, but not to the extent intended since the control pattern is just added. Still, the conclusion might be that the control worked a little, and so more control may be applied. This is an illusion and there was never any control involved. The thought to control thoughts did not originate from a supposed controller, but rather from the same place the rest of the thoughts came from; the past conditioning of beliefs, fears and desires. At this point, there is the belief in a controller, and some other thoughts that need to be controlled. What started out as one apparent person wanting to simply choose his thoughts has now become two apparent thought sources in conflict. Nobody starts out thinking that they are two, but the false idea of control leads to the erroneous conclusion that the failure to control must be the result of there being a mind, and then a person trying to control mind. This battle is not only fruitless, but also an additional source of struggle. Yea, once mind takes its light saber out and starts doing battle with itself, its gonna end up with a pretty bad hairday.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 23, 2013 0:13:46 GMT -8
Good stuff. The reason the split mind occurs is that there is the belief that there is a person forming his own thoughts consciously, and that this person can therefore stop thinking, or at least should be able to. So it begins innocently enough with the idea to think good thoughts or stop thinking or whatever. Since it's not actually true that there is conscious control, it doesn't actually work. What it amounts to is a control pattern overlaid onto the existing pattern of thought, which does influence the thoughts, but not to the extent intended since the control pattern is just added. Still, the conclusion might be that the control worked a little, and so more control may be applied. This is an illusion and there was never any control involved. The thought to control thoughts did not originate from a supposed controller, but rather from the same place the rest of the thoughts came from; the past conditioning of beliefs, fears and desires. At this point, there is the belief in a controller, and some other thoughts that need to be controlled. What started out as one apparent person wanting to simply choose his thoughts has now become two apparent thought sources in conflict. Nobody starts out thinking that they are two, but the false idea of control leads to the erroneous conclusion that the failure to control must be the result of there being a mind, and then a person trying to control mind. This battle is not only fruitless, but also an additional source of struggle. Yea, once mind takes its light saber out and starts doing battle with itself, its gonna end up with a pretty bad hairday. Fer sure. What I think I see happening in many cases when mind/body identification is questioned is that the imaginary controller dis-identifies with the mind it imagines it's controlling, which it has done anyway by positioning itself as controller. This is why it's so important to reassemble all the pieces parts before questioning the actuality of that identity. Split the mind in two, and then acknowledge one of them as an illusion. Gotta admit, it's a brilliant plan.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jan 23, 2013 0:40:34 GMT -8
Yea, once mind takes its light saber out and starts doing battle with itself, its gonna end up with a pretty bad hairday. Fer sure. What I think I see happening in many cases when mind/body identification is questioned is that the imaginary controller dis-identifies with the mind it imagines it's controlling, which it has done anyway by positioning itself as controller. This is why it's so important to reassemble all the pieces parts before questioning the actuality of that identity. Split the mind in two, and then acknowledge one of them as an illusion. Gotta admit, it's a brilliant plan. Thank God there's only the Self and no one else to blame.
|
|
|
Post by spongey on Jan 23, 2013 2:44:12 GMT -8
Autonomy is an idea I use to talk about a psychological structure in which the thinking mind is not in conflict with itself. In the absence of internal unresolved conflicts, the tendency for the mind to want to think and not think along the same lines at the same time, comes to an end, which would be a welcome ending for most peeps one would think. Have you ever had the experience of wanting to stop your thought processes? Of thinking you don't want to be thinking, in the process of thinking itself? Its a common tendency in most humans, to think that they don't want to be thinking from time to time. If we take a step back, we can see how absurd this tendency is. If you're thinking, its because you want to be thinking, and not because there's some mind which isn't you doing it. The question is, are we conscious of what's driving it? And the answer is always no. If we were conscious of what's driving it then the unconscious tendency wouldn't be happening. Its not even possible to want to think and not think at the same time. You think, and then imagine you don't want to be thinking, which is what we sometimes call a delusion. As we 'become conscious' that we aren't actually driving our thought stream, we can begin to understand how and why it moves in certain ways. Becoming conscious is like untying your mind so you can see that you're free. If you're scared to feel a certain way, and you aren't conscious that you're scared, you will unconsciously avoid situations which you think might make you feel that way. And when you desire to be in that situation at the same time, you have a recipe for a split mind. By becoming conscious of the unconscious fears, you lose the banana split and are free to eat your hot fudge sundae. Yum yum! Good stuff. The reason the split mind occurs is that there is the belief that there is a person forming his own thoughts consciously, and that this person can therefore stop thinking, or at least should be able to. So it begins innocently enough with the idea to think good thoughts or stop thinking or whatever. Since it's not actually true that there is conscious control, it doesn't actually work. What it amounts to is a control pattern overlaid onto the existing pattern of thought, which does influence the thoughts, but not to the extent intended since the control pattern is just added. Still, the conclusion might be that the control worked a little, and so more control may be applied. This is an illusion and there was never any control involved. The thought to control thoughts did not originate from a supposed controller, but rather from the same place the rest of the thoughts came from; the past conditioning of beliefs, fears and desires. At this point, there is the belief in a controller, and some other thoughts that need to be controlled. What started out as one apparent person wanting to simply choose his thoughts has now become two apparent thought sources in conflict. Nobody starts out thinking that they are two, but the false idea of control leads to the erroneous conclusion that the failure to control must be the result of there being a mind, and then a person trying to control mind. This battle is not only fruitless, but also an additional source of struggle. Not enough to just know it though. The illusion has to be seen through. If it isn't, improving thoughts may be a good temporary option?!
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jan 23, 2013 4:25:03 GMT -8
Not enough to just know it though. The illusion has to be seen through. If it isn't, improving thoughts may be a good temporary option?! Who would benefit?
|
|
|
Post by jasonlynch on Jan 23, 2013 4:57:34 GMT -8
Fer sure. What I think I see happening in many cases when mind/body identification is questioned is that the imaginary controller dis-identifies with the mind it imagines it's controlling, which it has done anyway by positioning itself as controller. This is why it's so important to reassemble all the pieces parts before questioning the actuality of that identity. Split the mind in two, and then acknowledge one of them as an illusion. Gotta admit, it's a brilliant plan. Thank God there's only the Self and no one else to blame. @enig and @ reefs Tru dat
|
|
|
Post by jasonlynch on Jan 23, 2013 5:09:05 GMT -8
Good stuff. The reason the split mind occurs is that there is the belief that there is a person forming his own thoughts consciously, and that this person can therefore stop thinking, or at least should be able to. So it begins innocently enough with the idea to think good thoughts or stop thinking or whatever. Since it's not actually true that there is conscious control, it doesn't actually work. What it amounts to is a control pattern overlaid onto the existing pattern of thought, which does influence the thoughts, but not to the extent intended since the control pattern is just added. Still, the conclusion might be that the control worked a little, and so more control may be applied. This is an illusion and there was never any control involved. The thought to control thoughts did not originate from a supposed controller, but rather from the same place the rest of the thoughts came from; the past conditioning of beliefs, fears and desires. At this point, there is the belief in a controller, and some other thoughts that need to be controlled. What started out as one apparent person wanting to simply choose his thoughts has now become two apparent thought sources in conflict. Nobody starts out thinking that they are two, but the false idea of control leads to the erroneous conclusion that the failure to control must be the result of there being a mind, and then a person trying to control mind. This battle is not only fruitless, but also an additional source of struggle. Not enough to just know it though. The illusion has to be seen through. If it isn't, improving thoughts may be a good temporary option?! The desire to improve your thoughts implies that you aren't happy with what you aren't in control of in the first place. That's a seed for a split. What are your thoughts going to be better than? The other ones that already happened? Imagining the giraffe in your living room has a Mister T gold chain that you can take to the pawn shop and flip is a cool story, but when the tax collector comes knocking on your door, you're still gonna have an issue.
|
|
|
Post by humphrey on Jan 23, 2013 9:02:37 GMT -8
Usually when I'm thinking that I'd like not to be thinking, I'd rather be sleeping. Tossing and turning, jacked up on caffeine. There's an energy there that is spinning thoughts like a top. If the energy was there and there was 'less inclination' to think, maybe due to missing unconscious tendencies, would there just be jacked up energy? Of course, probably with more consciousness I wouldn't be getting jacked in the first place. Getting high to avoid thinking and feeling a certain way, when on a certain level, you want to think and feel that way, is an indication of an already existing mind split. If your mind truly wants to write a program for better sleep, it will write it. And that may very well involve cutting back on the caffeine. Right now, that's just not what you want. In terms of the energy spinning thoughts like a top and the 'inclination to think': I would say harboring conflicts internally can manifest as chaos on the surface level of mind. The distortion from what isn't resolved is the lens through which consciousness creates through. The personal experience is the source of the distortion. Ironically, you can't find the 'actual person' at the source of that experience. When what is conscious of mind engages mind, there is a constriction of focus or attention into the thought stream. Consciousness creates and perceives thought simultaneoulsy, and the idea that what is created needs to, or could, stop itself, is silly. The thought processes which are undesirable, are undesirable only to an idea which represents the source of those thought processes. Ideas don't have anything to worry about. They're just ideas. Back to your question, staying unconscious takes a lot of energy and manifests in the experience in all sorts of ways. In the absence of exerting energy to remain unconscious, you are free from the idea that there was someone exerting something in the first place, which is why we say that life becomes effortless when we aren't sleeping at the wheel. Energy is still expended, but never wasted. The idea that thoughts can battle thoughts is a misconception, yet dynamically, something that seemingly happens. Being fully conscious is the absence of that seeming happening. I think I get this. The split-mind kabuki theater of thoughts battling thoughts is the source of suffering. There is one thought that rules them all, which is the thought that 'other' thoughts should be different in some way.
|
|
|
Post by humphrey on Jan 23, 2013 9:04:09 GMT -8
Usually when I'm thinking that I'd like not to be thinking, I'd rather be sleeping. Tossing and turning, jacked up on caffeine. There's an energy there that is spinning thoughts like a top. If the energy was there and there was 'less inclination' to think, maybe due to missing unconscious tendencies, would there just be jacked up energy? Of course, probably with more consciousness I wouldn't be getting jacked in the first place. The 'jacked up' issue is interesting, maybe. What makes it seem jacked up is really the rapid pace of the thoughts themselves. In a hyper state, (when not trying to sleep) these thoughts usually lead to all sorts of physical activity too. It's possible to be 'jacked up' and have no thoughts at all. This is a state of heightened alertness, or we could say attentiveness, like a cat watching a mouse hole. We can see that the cat is not physically hyper, and we can at least imagine that it is intensely alert and focused on the the hole. Not thinking about how good the mouse will taste, or how long it might have to wait, or wondering if the kitty litter has been changed yet. There is just a single pointed, empty, alert attentiveness, and for a cat this makes it possible to react viscerally at lightning speed. For a human, it may be possible to notice that which is noticing. This empty, alert attention is not the least bit common for humans. When there is a space formed for attention, the strong tendency is to fill it with thoughts, and so I don't recommend 'jacking it up', but I also don't recommend putting mind into a trance state as often happens with meditation. In any case, high alertness does not equal spinning thoughts. The high alertness reminds me of mamza suggesting a good form of ATA is to lie in the middle of a road listening (for cars).
|
|
|
Post by humphrey on Jan 23, 2013 9:10:04 GMT -8
Autonomy is an idea I use to talk about a psychological structure in which the thinking mind is not in conflict with itself. In the absence of internal unresolved conflicts, the tendency for the mind to want to think and not think along the same lines at the same time, comes to an end, which would be a welcome ending for most peeps one would think. Have you ever had the experience of wanting to stop your thought processes? Of thinking you don't want to be thinking, in the process of thinking itself? Its a common tendency in most humans, to think that they don't want to be thinking from time to time. If we take a step back, we can see how absurd this tendency is. If you're thinking, its because you want to be thinking, and not because there's some mind which isn't you doing it. The question is, are we conscious of what's driving it? And the answer is always no. If we were conscious of what's driving it then the unconscious tendency wouldn't be happening. Its not even possible to want to think and not think at the same time. You think, and then imagine you don't want to be thinking, which is what we sometimes call a delusion. As we 'become conscious' that we aren't actually driving our thought stream, we can begin to understand how and why it moves in certain ways. Becoming conscious is like untying your mind so you can see that you're free. If you're scared to feel a certain way, and you aren't conscious that you're scared, you will unconsciously avoid situations which you think might make you feel that way. And when you desire to be in that situation at the same time, you have a recipe for a split mind. By becoming conscious of the unconscious fears, you lose the banana split and are free to eat your hot fudge sundae. Yum yum! Good stuff. The reason the split mind occurs is that there is the belief that there is a person forming his own thoughts consciously, and that this person can therefore stop thinking, or at least should be able to. So it begins innocently enough with the idea to think good thoughts or stop thinking or whatever. Since it's not actually true that there is conscious control, it doesn't actually work. What it amounts to is a control pattern overlaid onto the existing pattern of thought, which does influence the thoughts, but not to the extent intended since the control pattern is just added. Still, the conclusion might be that the control worked a little, and so more control may be applied. This is an illusion and there was never any control involved. The thought to control thoughts did not originate from a supposed controller, but rather from the same place the rest of the thoughts came from; the past conditioning of beliefs, fears and desires. At this point, there is the belief in a controller, and some other thoughts that need to be controlled. What started out as one apparent person wanting to simply choose his thoughts has now become two apparent thought sources in conflict. Nobody starts out thinking that they are two, but the false idea of control leads to the erroneous conclusion that the failure to control must be the result of there being a mind, and then a person trying to control mind. This battle is not only fruitless, but also an additional source of struggle. I think I get this too. So the tricky trick is what the hell do I do with this? Answer: irrelevant. LOOOOOK and see, is there actually anyone running the show? Answer: no and yet, the battle continues. Just walk off the battlefield. Be still. Being still is temporary, walking off the battlefield an illusion. It all makes sense... yet.
|
|