|
|
Post by Gopal on Apr 5, 2013 23:29:13 GMT -8
hi phil,
We don't have freewill why? because you are always in a thought, attention is arrested by the thought,This is what you are telling that we don't have freewill.right? What i meant to ask is, we are always in a thought, but we may be aware of the remaining things also,right? while I am seeing my computer, i am aware of the window,isn't it? If so, why can't I choose ?
RAJ
|
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Apr 6, 2013 14:49:49 GMT -8
hi phil, We don't have freewill why? because you are always in a thought, attention is arrested by the thought,This is what you are telling that we don't have freewill.right? What i meant to ask is, we are always in a thought, but we may be aware of the remaining things also,right? while I am seeing my computer, i am aware of the window,isn't it? If so, why can't I choose ? RAJ Hi Raj The choosing must take the form of another thought. Here's the deally: Thought forms spontaneously from what I call Intelligence (God, consciousness, Awareness, whatever). It means there is no mediator between Intelligence and the formation of the thought. The idea to initiate, control, change or stop a thought would be another prior thought that just forms in Intelligence. You can look and see for yourself right now that this is so, because you are the one looking rather than the mind/thoughts that are occurring. This seeing will lead to thoughts, but the seeing itself is thoughtless. Awareness is fully present and fully aware, but awareness does not constitute a separate mediator of some kind that can choose what to think or where to focus attention, which is why it is said that awareness has no concern and is not disturbed by anything. The disturbance is only in mind; the forming/engaging of a thought, and you are not whatever that thought refers to. You are the one observing the thoughts that you form spontaneously, and the forming and observing are the same and simultaneous. The question of free will originates in a misunderstanding. It's not that you do not have free will, it's more that the person to whom the notion of free will would apply is merely another thought. It's like thinking you are a pterodactyl and wanting to know how far you should be able to fly without resting. The question is misconceived. And so there is no problem of no free will once you see that the whole issue arises from a misunderstanding and mis-identification. See that you are not the person to whom the question of free will can apply. |
|
|
|
Post by sufilight on Apr 6, 2013 16:23:40 GMT -8
This is a good discussion, thanks Raj for bringing it up. Phil, I struggle with the idea that we don't have free will as I seem to have used my free will many times in my life. So, life is not about free will but moving with the moment to moment experiences that arise; outcome which already has happened before we became consciously aware of it? This is what I am understanding from your post. Am I making sense?  |
|
burt
Member
Posts: 198
|
Post by burt on Apr 6, 2013 21:40:52 GMT -8
hi phil, We don't have freewill why? because you are always in a thought, attention is arrested by the thought,This is what you are telling that we don't have freewill.right? What i meant to ask is, we are always in a thought, but we may be aware of the remaining things also,right? while I am seeing my computer, i am aware of the window,isn't it? If so, why can't I choose ? RAJ Raj, I had this discussion with Phil a few years back and while my 2 cents, if I could spare them, would be cast into a different part of the wishing well, I don't disagree with anything that he wrote just then. More importantly, I can tell you, FWIW (and not to say that you'd thought of this or didn't know it already), that I'm pretty certain that Phil doesn't want anything from you. (edit: delayed metaphor improvement syndrome) |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Apr 7, 2013 23:45:07 GMT -8
This is a good discussion, thanks Raj for bringing it up. Phil, I struggle with the idea that we don't have free will as I seem to have used my free will many times in my life. So, life is not about free will but moving with the moment to moment experiences that arise; outcome which already has happened before we became consciously aware of it? This is what I am understanding from your post. Am I making sense? I wouldn't say anything has happened before there is conscious awareness of it. Again, perception and creation are the same. Nothing has been preplanned or predestined. It's all happening now. The confusion is with the identification with your own dream character. That's the reason for the idea about free will. The idea is misconceived. |
|
|
|
Post by Gopal on Apr 8, 2013 6:31:43 GMT -8
hi burt,
OK,thank you.
------------------------
hi Enigma,
I strongly admit the point of freewill is an illusion because that's my direct seeing as well.
Again I am going to ask some question which you might familiar with,
1)" This seeing will lead to thoughts, but the seeing itself is thoughtless".
you are not left with no thought,Have you ever? when you are expecting for a next thought, you are not left with no thought, but you are in "expecting thought" for next thought, So seeing is nothing but perception of thought.
2)You said everything is created from present thought,Ok let it be, Now you are setting an intent to meet a person or you are using law of attraction to meet a person, Now as for as you are concerns God(all individual included) only knows what is the present thought of everyone,he doesn't know anything about the future. That being the case,how can he manifest an intent in the future? in our case meeting the person, And you said there exist a preexisting flow,Where does this preexisting flow remains? who maintain this while God only aware of the present thought of all(I am not separating God from Individual).
3) Now look at the reality, when creation unfolds, you might notice that a particular person seems to be created to accomplish a certain task, for an example, if you are an angry person, then your aspect of angry would be expressed by "certain individuals" not by some random individual, Once this aspect eradicated these persons also would be replaced, Isn't it clear that there is a third entity maintains this reality very carefully?What I meant to say is, people are created in such a way that they have to accomplish a certain task. So God is not falling into his own dream.
4)Again I am bring my old point to you, Perceiver can't seperated from perceived, Creation and percetion are one. when you say seeing itself thoughtless, you are sepearating the perceiver from perceived, because Perceiver=Perceived, perceiver is not looing into a thought,thought and perceiver can't be separated.Ok let's us do some experiment, look at what is your thought right now, then you would say you are unchanging and thoughts are flowing in your attention,NO ofcourse it's wrong, because perceiver can't look into nothing if something is not to be perceived. if you say he could, then tell me what is nothing? if you say he perceives nothing, then it's not nothing,it's something.Isn't it?
RAJ
|
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Apr 8, 2013 8:21:41 GMT -8
hi burt, OK,thank you. ------------------------ hi Enigma, I strongly admit the point of freewill is an illusion because that's my direct seeing as well. Again I am going to ask some question which you might familiar with, 1)" This seeing will lead to thoughts, but the seeing itself is thoughtless". you are not left with no thought,Have you ever? when you are expecting for a next thought, you are not left with no thought, but you are in "expecting thought" for next thought, So seeing is nothing but perception of thought. So your "direct seeing" is just the perception of thought? How does this differ from the perception of other thoughts? There's no pre-existing flow and intentions do not become manifest. Intentions are already manifestations happening in the present. If there is 'meeting a person' it is a manifestation happening in the present. Things don't happen in the future. People are not created to accomplish certain tasks. Why do tasks need to be accomplished? A given person has certain attributes, and these attributes are both created and creative. It's just the expression of Intelligence. Not only is a third entity not required, the first and second are not required either. |
|
|
|
Post by Gopal on Apr 9, 2013 0:39:19 GMT -8
I didn't meant to say it was a thought, I have seen the integrated movement of cosmos,Or i have seen everything revolves around me.
I am not sure whether you understood rightly here or not. Yes the intentions is already manifestation. But what I meant to say was, for an example, when you affirm or visualize(affirm is also an manifestation) your movements starts(outer world)to flow to meet a person.After some time lap you would meet that person.Once you meet the person, you can recall the events which led you to meet this person. There you might find the intelligent orchestration. Now What i meant to say is, this orchestration is not possible while God is always in the preset thought of all person, Instead he has to know the future state of that reality,isn't it?
Yes, But same person who has certain characteristic has always been used for a certain purpose. Love is not expressed by nuclear terrorist,isn't it?
|
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Apr 9, 2013 10:28:04 GMT -8
I didn't meant to say it was a thought, I have seen the integrated movement of cosmos,Or i have seen everything revolves around me. You said "seeing is nothing but perception of thought". Did you mean to say something else? No, the orchestration is only apparent when one looks over the unfolding of events and assigns necessity to them. As an example, it's true in a scientific context that a large number of apparent synchronicities had to take place with precision in order for humans to come into being and thrive on planet Earth. If the sun were only slightly hotter or cooler, or the atmosphere were made up differently, humans couldn't exist at all. The probability of all the required factors coming together at once is astronomical, and so many conclude that there must have been a plan. The error is in looking backwards from the result of those factors and calling them necessary requirements. The same could be done with a lottery ball. The cage spins and hundreds of thousands of collisions result in the number 4 ball falling out of the slot. We don't consider it remarkable at all unless we count the number of 'coincidental' collisions that had to take place in order for that ball to emerge. From that perspective, the odds of the #4 ball falling out of the slot are virtually nil, and yet it happened. One of those collisions is analogous to your "affirmation", another is analogous to a 'coincidental' trip to this other person's city, and meeting that person is analogous to the #4 ball dropping. The intention, along with all other events leading up to the meeting, are already 'collisions': part of the 'manifestation'. What we call a manifestation is the #4 ball falling out of the slot from the perspective of one of the balls that is colliding with the #4 ball and pushing it out the slot. What I have implied is that there is just a flow of 'collisions' happening, though there is a present moment intelligence involved that influences the movement of all the balls at once in this moment. This intelligence has not decided ahead of time that the #4 ball will drop, and does not know it will, but rather it IS the flow of collisions unfolding and experiencing that unfolding and revealing the outcome of it's own flow. The river does not know where it is going and doesn't plan it's destination, but it does 'experience' it's own flow as it approaches the lake. It doesn't imagine it is 'manifesting' flowing into the lake, or that God has determined it's fate, because it doesn't have the human capacity for self delusion. Used for a certain purpose? How do you know that? |
|
|
|
Post by Gopal on Apr 10, 2013 4:55:50 GMT -8
Enigma,
I like your explanation, but this boll collision can't be compared to the real time coincidence, for an instance i take a paragraph from you writing,
Here is first collision itself decides the direction of the four boll falling, Or the boll direction, here direction is decided by hit, Here what makes you to think there is direction here when you are experiencing the thought flow? There is no towards here.
|
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Apr 10, 2013 15:00:25 GMT -8
Enigma, I like your explanation, but this boll collision can't be compared to the real time coincidence, for an instance i take a paragraph from you writing, Here is first collision itself decides the direction of the four boll falling, Or the boll direction, here direction is decided by hit, Here what makes you to think there is direction here when you are experiencing the thought flow? There is no towards here. Sorry, Raj, can you rephrase? |
|
|
|
Post by Portto on Apr 11, 2013 6:10:29 GMT -8
hi phil, We don't have freewill why? because you are always in a thought, attention is arrested by the thought,This is what you are telling that we don't have freewill.right? What i meant to ask is, we are always in a thought, but we may be aware of the remaining things also,right? while I am seeing my computer, i am aware of the window,isn't it? If so, why can't I choose ? RAJ Freewill is not some basic/inherent/transcendent quality of life. Freewill is one of mind-reflections of life. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Apr 11, 2013 16:41:41 GMT -8
hi phil, We don't have freewill why? because you are always in a thought, attention is arrested by the thought,This is what you are telling that we don't have freewill.right? What i meant to ask is, we are always in a thought, but we may be aware of the remaining things also,right? while I am seeing my computer, i am aware of the window,isn't it? If so, why can't I choose ? RAJ Freewill is not some basic/inherent/transcendent quality of life. Freewill is one of mind-reflections of life. Right-o. It's just an idea that has no foundation or validity or significance. |
|
burt
Member
Posts: 198
|
Post by burt on Apr 12, 2013 12:24:27 GMT -8
Man makes plans, God laughs.
|
|
|
|
Post by sufilight on Apr 12, 2013 16:42:24 GMT -8
This is a good discussion, thanks Raj for bringing it up. Phil, I struggle with the idea that we don't have free will as I seem to have used my free will many times in my life. So, life is not about free will but moving with the moment to moment experiences that arise; outcome which already has happened before we became consciously aware of it? This is what I am understanding from your post. Am I making sense? I wouldn't say anything has happened before there is conscious awareness of it. Again, perception and creation are the same. Nothing has been preplanned or predestined. It's all happening now. The confusion is with the identification with your own dream character. That's the reason for the idea about free will. The idea is misconceived. "Perception and creation are the same, and all is happening in the NOW." I know we have discussed this many times but it's still conceptual to me, especially in terms of free will. It sounds a little scary as it collapses all I believe regarding reality, yet at the same time I feel the promise of freedom once I truly 'see' it. Will keep 'looking'.  |
|
