paradox, thanks again for your attempt at clarification. Assuming I grok your restated question, I will respond that the ‘more’ can be known equally as well. One caveat: I don’t embrace (yet do recognize them as existent) Faith nor Revelation as methodology… so this may not fit within your personal context as an answer.
On Jul 21, 10:26 am, paradox <[email protected]> wrote: > The question was more mine, OM. Here's what i'm thinking; we can > "know" and "feel" mind in the nude, without the accoutrements of the > autobiographical self (this is contentious though, i admit, but i'm on > the same page as Molly and yourself on this); the quality of that > conception is not the "sum" of neurobiological processes, it's more > (hence non-reductive); question (for me) is where the "more" comes > from (you can infer by this that i'm still on my journey of Faith). > It's the concept that science terms "Emergence". > > On Jul 16, 7:06 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the response paradox. > > > I’m not sure that we raised nor intended to raise a question. > > Apparently you see one though. With this assumption along with your > > opinion about an *unresolved* question about ‘quality of mind’, what, > > for you, could/would resolve said question? > > > On Jul 16, 5:15 am, paradox <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > More relationship than locality, OM; yes, movies we watch; i was re- > > > framing; our inner lives are a result of our neuro-physiological > > > architecture, yet non-reductive. Molly (and you) raise an interesting > > > (and as yet unresolved IMO) question regarding the quality of sheer > > > presence of mind. > > > > On Jul 15, 10:36 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > Paradox, IF I grok your question re: paradox, apparently … since you > > > > broached the notion. > > > > > As to ‘movie’ etc., perhaps you are asking as to its locality? Here > > > > I’m guessing (clearly not knowing) that you mean actual movies we > > > > watch. If not, your question is way too esoteric for me. An unpacking > > > > would be of benefit in such a case. > > > > > Thanks! > > > > OM > > > > > On Jul 15, 11:33 am, paradox <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Could this be the ultimate paradox, i wonder (no reference intended), > > > > > o'mind; where is the "movie"? celluloid or storyline? Both? > > > > > > On Jul 14, 5:34 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > When it comes to Mind, awareness, thought, brain, subconscious, True > > > > > > Self etc., it is all too easy to get lost in semantics and personal > > > > > > beliefs based on limited experience. > > > > > > > Some skeptical materialists demand that, in a sense, we are our > > > > > > thoughts…our thoughts are entirely electrochemical mechanisms…thus, > > > > > > we > > > > > > are only physical ‘beings’. This is understandable. There is plenty > > > > > > in > > > > > > current day realms of science to keep them busy. On the other hand, > > > > > > for those who have experienced that which is not thought, the > > > > > > awareness prior to thought or the unity of this emptiness and > > > > > > relative/ > > > > > > subjective thinking or the infinite, radiant oneness that is the > > > > > > Ultimate Ground of existence, simple mental constructs are known for > > > > > > what they are. > > > > > > > Molly has this one right…’right’ in the sense of knowing a larger > > > > > > view. > > > > > > > On Jul 14, 5:09 am, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > I am suggesting that unless you clear the mind of thought, > > > > > > > feeling, > > > > > > > sensation, belief, image - and allow it to be filled only with the > > > > > > > eternal presence that is you - your experience and mind will > > > > > > > preoccupy > > > > > > > itself with the limits of mind and nothing more. There is more to > > > > > > > life. There is more to me. All ways more. > > > > > > > > On Jul 14, 7:42 am, Lee Douglas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hey Molly, > > > > > > > > > Yes indeed there are many parts of the human dedicated to > > > > > > > > keeping it > > > > > > > > alive. > > > > > > > > > The mind is a function of the brain though isn't it, rather like > > > > > > > > running is a function of the legs and the heart and the lungs? > > > > > > > > > So without the legs, heart and lungs, there will be no running. > > > > > > > > Like > > > > > > > > without the brain there would be no mind. > > > > > > > > > It is not hard to see that we use our intelect to study; > > > > > > > > intelect a > > > > > > > > funtion of the mind, which in turn is a function of the brain, > > > > > > > > so as I > > > > > > > > say I see no problems in seeing that the mind is used to study > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > mind, yes even our own minds. > > > > > > > > > I don't agree that there exists an awareness beyond mind, I have > > > > > > > > throughout my short span of life experianced all sorts of weird > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > wonderfull things, yet still I say that all awareness takes > > > > > > > > place in > > > > > > > > the mind. When I have had periods of expansion of the mind, it > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > still all taking place in my brain. > > > > > > > > > Think of it this way,I am dyslexic and this is because > > > > > > > > something about > > > > > > > > my brain causes certain senseory inputs to be inturpreted in a > > > > > > > > way > > > > > > > > that differs from the non dyslexic. This is most evidant in my > > > > > > > > spelling and if you read through enough of my posts you'll > > > > > > > > notice > > > > > > > > things like the way I often write 'Form' instead of 'From' > > > > > > > > > Would you suggest that my dyslexcia stems form a place > > > > > > > > independant of > > > > > > > > my brain? > > > > > > > > > Nope I don't think it would be correct to suggest such a thing. > > > > > > > > Yet > > > > > > > > dyslexcia is a huge part of who I am, it has shapped my mind > > > > > > > > since my > > > > > > > > birth, it forces me to approach things in ways that the non > > > > > > > > dyslexic > > > > > > > > would not consider, I need to think about things in certian > > > > > > > > ways to > > > > > > > > ensure that my dyslexcia does not hinder my day to day life. > > > > > > > > > What I'm saying here is that my dsylexic experiances which we > > > > > > > > could > > > > > > > > say take place in my mind, are a function of my brain. If these > > > > > > > > experiances take place in my brain, so have all of my > > > > > > > > experiances, > > > > > > > > includeing all of the trances, and dream states, all of the > > > > > > > > meditations, all of the high magiks and ceremonies, all of this > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > taken place in my brain, the home of my mind. I have not > > > > > > > > encountered > > > > > > > > one iota of evidance nor experiance to suggest other wise. > > > > > > > > > Perhaps though the most telling is in the use of LSD, or any > > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > > pschyotropic substance. When 'tripping' all sorts of things can > > > > > > > > happen, you can just enjoy the buzz for what it is, you can use > > > > > > > > it to > > > > > > > > 'open the doors of perception', but all who have partaken more > > > > > > > > than a > > > > > > > > few times know that to stave off a 'bad trip' it is useful to > > > > > > > > remind > > > > > > > > yourself that it is just the drug, and when the chemical > > > > > > > > reactions of > > > > > > > > the drug in your brain whare off, then all goes back to normal. > > > > > > > > > It is possible to use LSD to expand the mind? Yes of course it > > > > > > > > is, > > > > > > > > and chemicaly speaking the same result from a differant > > > > > > > > meathod(meditiaon for example) cause the same chemical changes > > > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > brain. > > > > > > > > > Almost finished now honset, so to reiterate in the shortest > > > > > > > > possibel > > > > > > > > way. > > > > > > > > > The mind is seated in the brain, there is no other place that > > > > > > > > the mind > > > > > > > > exists. > > > > > > > > > On Jul 14, 11:20 am, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I do not follow you Lee. The same (that you say of the > > > > > > > > > brain) could > > > > > > > > > be said of the heart, circulatory system, respiratory system, > > > > > > > > > liver, > > > > > > > > > kidneys etc. If they are not working, the life of the body > > > > > > > > > ends, > > > > > > > > > unless extended mechanically. We don't know if it continues > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > another form - or I could say, our knowing is not contained > > > > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > > mind. > > > > > > > > > > While the brain is not the same as the mind, there is an > > > > > > > > > awareness > > > > > > > > > beyond mind. If you have not experienced it, you may think > > > > > > > > > me out of > > > > > > > > > my mind. If you have never had a completely quiet mind, you > > > > > > > > > may not > > > > > > > > > have had the opportunity to go beyond it. (and I mean you in > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > general sense of everyone, not you in particular, Lee) My > > > > > > > > > mind is > > > > > > > > > located in me, with my thoughts, feelings and sensations - > > > > > > > > > and is non > > > > > > > > > local, and that is the infinite aspect. > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 13, 9:01 am, Lee Douglas <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Molly says: > > > > > > > > > > > 'it is the mind that is aware - if you are witnessing, or > > > > > > > > > > "aware" of > > > > > > > > > > the contents of you mind, what part of you is that? There > > > > > > > > > > is more > > > > > > > > > > than the mind in each and every one of us' > > > > > > > > > > > That is also the mind Molly. The seat of self is in the > > > > > > > > > > brain, no > > > > > > > > > > working brain no self. When you look in the mirror you see > > > > > > > > > > your own > > > > > > > > > > reflection so it is of course possible to use your eyes to > > > > > > > > > > study your > > > > > > > > > > own eyes, why not then use the mind to study the mind? I > > > > > > > > > > see no > > > > > > > > > > problems with this at all, indeed what other organ would > > > > > > > > > > you use to > > > > > > > > > > study the mind, or for that matter the study of anything? > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 13, 6:20 am, "Tony Orlow" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear RP - > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you disagree with partaking of the herb which led us > > > > > > > > > > > to the discovery > > > > > > > > > > > of 0, and of oo, and of god and science? With the seeds > > > > > > > > > > > being perfect > > > > > > > > > > > food, and the resins being the lost vitamin, being so > > > > > > > > > > > under fire this > > > > > > > > > > > last century of war, and being the greatest source of > > > > > > > > > > > fiber for all > > > > > > > > > > > uses, and being one of the strongest and most beautiful > > > > > > > > > > > of plants, can > > > > > > > > > > > it be bad? If I have partaken as long as I can remember, > > > > > > > > > > > and merit this > > > > > > > > > > > personal > > ... > > read more »
