awakeningtothedream.com

[cimages]

If thoughts create the illusion….if thoughts are part of the illusion…does it not stand to reason that every idea or concept….that is in the stream of thought process….that is defined by thoughts are also…..illusion?

Does this not make suspect anything that has entered the conscious realm…including consciousness itself…. any & all thoughts about…’THIS’…?

What is being suggested here is that any ‘THING’ can not be determined to be illusion or not because it’s in the thought stream? Including, IF there is a ‘THING’ or not?

That ‘THING’ could be real but your perception of it as part of the thought stream is….POSSIBLY…..what makes it an illusion? Because….what appears as you don’t have the ability as part of the thought stream yourself….to determine what it actually is….or is not?......Including…..what appears as you?

Does not any thought, idea, concept, perception, experience, feeling, sense or premonition of “Non Duality” or ‘you’ or ‘I’ being this “Awareness” in which all things unfold has to be considered as much an illusion…..or not….as duality?

This is just an exercise in critical analysis by thoughts….interpreting other….thoughts!

If this analysis seems sound to you, or not, there is nothing that you can do to accept this or to reject it…….but this seems sound to me…but because its part of the thought stream…it must be as suspect as any & everything else! Including if it is this me, or not, that it seems sound to, or if it is just thoughts suggesting to other thoughts, that it is that which seems sound!

When thoughts cease….every-thing….just dissolves…..because thoughts can not interpret, define or color that which is prior to thoughts…that which is prior to consciousness……as an experience.

I was not sure why the term “non” experience was used to express a state of being when all thoughts ceased, but now I do! Thoughts can only interpret some-thing as an experience that seem to occur within the current running thought stream….thusly…what it is or is not…is determined by thoughts/perception…but this does not mean it is that…thusly illusion!

Thoughts can ONLY do an ‘analysis’, of that, which occurs outside its normal processing capacity & therefore can not apply its interpretation because it did not appear as a currently running stream of thoughts!

This now makes perfect sense….but this statement too must be suspect!

BEING….is….because this state is a “non” experience outside the thought stream!

Peace!

[fox]

[cimages]

[michael]

Thoughts don't 'do' analysis. Thoughts don't do anything.

What follows is not analysis. It is simply observation... 'self evident'.

When someone appears to speak in English, certain sounds are heard. When they appear to speak in French, different sounds appear.

Take the word 'dog' spoken in English, and the words 'le chien' spoken in French... very different sounds, same meaning... same idea.

Of itself, the sounds are meaningless... 'self evident'. All the meaning is in the idea itself. What is the 'nature' of this idea/meaning... no idea.

Thought seems like a 'subtle sound'... as though a 'voice' is expressing the 'thought' in the language of 'the thinker'. (there is no such 'thinker'. ).

'Thinking' in English, or in French is just like speaking: ideas that have the same meaning are the same idea... regardless of the different sounds that give the ideas their apparent form (word sound).

The idea that is in awareness (as the meaning of the thought is understood) appears to comment upon or pose questions about 'experience'. Any such comment is not the 'experience'.

So 'what' is the experience?

Simply observing the apparent 'experience' it is clear the it comprises fleeting ever-changing colours, sounds, tastes, odours, flavours and feelings. Simply observing, it is self evident that 'in themselves' these sensations are meaningless. As to 'what' is the nature of these sensations... no idea .

That these fleeting sensations (in themselves meaningless) appear to have meaning... appear to tell a story, appear to give the story its substance and form... is an illusion.

Observing dreams:

The same sensations that appear to give a 'nightly dream' its substance and form are the same that appear to give 'reality' to the 'waking state'.

There are not two 'seeings', one that sees 'nightly dreams' (made of 'dream stuff') and another that sees 'waking objects' (made of 'matter stuff').

It is the one seeing, in which the seen is one with the seeing. Of 'what' it is actually composed... to that there is no answer.

The story exists solely in the meaning that is known and no where else... 'self evident'.

Thoughts that comment upon or question 'experience' are simply ideas about reality. Thoughts cannot analyse reality. Thoughts simply express meaning. And meaning refers only to itself, it can say nothing of the nature of being or consciousness.

So what of these thoughts expressed in this post?

Words/thoughts may be used to point directly at here and now... at that which is.

The words 'seeing/colour' point directly at the reality. The words do not explain or analyse... they simply point. That which sees cannot see to what they point, yet here is seeing... undeniable, without doubt, without error: one with being.

The words 'knowing/meaning' point directly at the reality. The words do not explain or analyse... they simply point. That which knows, cannot know to what they point, yet here is knowing... undeniable, without doubt, without error: one with being.

And so for all the senses.

That which knows, knows only meaning. As colour is one with seeing, so meaning is one with knowing. Being one, meaning is 'unchanging' and is thus called 'real'. This notion of reality applies only to meaning as a whole, not to the 'things' known or defined by meaning.

Each 'thing' defined/labelled as a separate entity within this network of meaning has no independent reality. Like the 'river' spoken of in another post.

Again, this is a simple observation... knowing what is known. The nature of this knowing is unknowable. It cannot be communicated. There is no one to communicate it to.

Love
_________________
From Source to Source: an Endless Spring

[cimages]

[fox]

"...Take the word 'dog' spoken in English..."


dog, spelled backwards...



_________________
Atheists responsible for Adolf Hitler's cruelties?

[michael]

cimages, you have shattered me

No belly laughs, just a big grin has been hanging around since reading the post... the grins still here

Of course words are analysis when read for meaning. The point of all posts in this forum, is not their meaning... the point is the pointing. Which in itself is quite pointless

You can't understand some posts. Good! Who says they are for the understanding

There is only one (reader) and that is the one reading these words now.

So, without analysis, what is observed?

No need to say, no one to tell it to.

Away with words... no more forum. Seeming to come back... the forum continues. Words seem to arise, meaning is understood. The play goes on.

No matter, never mind.

Isn't it amazing.

Love
_________________
From Source to Source: an Endless Spring