[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Main Index][Thread Index]

# Re: mind chatter : what plane ?

#### Message 01679 of 3835

- To: BardonPraxis@yahoogroups.com
- Subject: Re: mind chatter : what plane ?
- From: "forestofsymbols" <forestofsymbols@...>
- Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 00:06:06 -0000
- In-reply-to: <bnudc9+r026@eGroups.com>
- User-agent: eGroups-EW/0.82

    Peter,

    Synchronicity strikes again. And maybe tikkun.

    > By all means, play the devil's advocate. If you are familiar with
    the
    > manner in which Rabbi's study you no doubt know the imporatance of
    > the devils advocate.

    Absolutely. The importance of which seems to be all but forgotten
    by all too many. I should have said I was asking sincerely, and not
    just to try to disprove some one, attempt to "establish myself",
    argue pointlessly as I had already made up my mind, or play other
    mindless games.

    > The major problem that I see is that you are making the equation:
    > mind chatter = the monkey mind and since the monkey mind is an
    > unwanted state, therefore mind chatter is an unwanted state of
    mind.
    > A perfectly logical sylogism A is B; B is C; therefore A is C.
    Would
    > be all well and good if all of the premises (ie. A is B and B is C)
    > where true. Which is something that I don't find to be the case.

    I started to realize this. Earlier today, I was looking at IIH and
    noticed that this is what Bardon had to say about our subconscious
    "[S]ubconsciousness is the incentive of all we do not wish for. Let
    us learn how to transmute this, so to speak, antagonistic aspect of
    our ego, so that it not only does no harm, but on the contrary will
    help to realize our desires." I see a lot of similarities between
    mental chatter and the subconscious, and in fact have followed the
    chatter to more "subconscious" realms (but that's a whole different
    topic). What I hadn't fully realized what is meant by the general
    theorem that power itself is neither good nor evil, but it may put to
    good or evil purposes. Or, as the ARA would say "Guns don't kill
    people. People kill people."

    > For example, if one is obsessing about a certian person, or
    > situation, or matter, one is already within a one pointed, fixed
    > state of mind upon that one thing.

    I understand and agree completely. Well put. This is a good way to
    organize it and I think I will.

    > Moreover, while Bardon does suggest that the scholar maintain a
    state
    > of one pointedness (ie. when walking, just walk; when typing, just
    > type; and so forth) throughout the day to develop a strong will and
    > intellect. He does not state that it is absolutely necessary. At
    > least within the first few steps of IIH. Once one progresses a
    little
    > bit farther down the path things have a tendency to change slightly
    > in regards to this.

    I was thinking more of maintaining thought observation during the
    day. The more I do so, the less I identify, the more free I become,
    the more I am.

    mj

- References:
  - Re: mind chatter : what plane ?
    - From: "Peter Reist" <preist@...>

- Prev by Date: Re: A nice, sweet, mental sleep.
- Next by Date: Re: A nice, sweet, mental sleep.
- Previous by thread: Re: mind chatter : what plane ?
- Next by thread: Frabato french forum, new address
- Indexes:
  - Main
  - Thread

Main Index | Thread Index