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

# Re: On the nature of a Idea

#### Message 01492 of 3835

- To: BardonPraxis@yahoogroups.com
- Subject: Re: On the nature of a Idea
- From: "SeaWinder" <seawinder@...>
- Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 13:19:46 -0000
- In-reply-to: <20030917195437.80151.qmail@...>
- User-agent: eGroups-EW/0.82

    Hello Eric;

    There is a distinct chance that Rawn will type an answer to you, but
    I wanted to jump in and give a few thoughts on this topic. I've
    thought a lot about it too.

    > I do notice several layers in what we call a idea. First, the very
    sound of it, the prononciation in one's mind.

    When one listens to one's own mind, to an idea, the idea is already
    formed. It is then the mind that is watching something that it thinks
    that it created, and not letting go of it. The mind "thinks." This
    sets up road blocks, I've found. It constrains the entire process to
    just the block in front of your street. To your own block. To your
    own neighborhood.

    If, following the constructs of yogic breathing exercises in
    meditations you "follow" the idea to it's origins, by repeating it
    and learning to listen to the "speaker" of the word (peace for
    instance) then you are led to the root of the ideation of the word.
    This root, origination of the ideation of the word is in your chest,
    and there is a peaceful quiet, still lake top of water there. When
    you allow a thought to form within you there is a drip of water on
    the top of the lake causing a ripple.

    This ripple is comprised of two things, an idea and an emotion. This
    is the anatomy of a thought. The emotion is either the emotion that
    spawned the idea or the emotion that is caused by the idea or a
    combination of both.

    This thought/idea then rises in our inner system to the brain, which
    can be seen as a huge room filled with 20 million pidgeon hole mail
    boxes, each mail box holds a different "word". One grabs at the
    strings from each mailbox to create a string of words to form a
    sentence. Each one of these words has a feeling or emotion attached
    to it. When one puts the strings of many words in one's hand many of
    the emotions of the singular words are lessened, or merge to form an
    even stronger emotion picture/feeling. (Shakespear play for instance?
    Romeo and Juliet?).

    >Then will come maybe the quality of it, the differents sensations it
    >can produce (will that be the personal meaning we give it, according
    >to our conditioning, education...?) and after, maybe, if lucky the
    >actual meaning, or intention behind the word and sensations.
    >

    The intention behind the word is to be found in following the sound
    of the word back to its origination point. This is the laketop within
    the chest image that I alluded to earlier. This is where the science
    of following the feeling of a word will take you back to. There is in
    itself great peace in watching the lake top silent and still and
    watching one word/idea drip its drop onto the placid lake top,
    forming the ripple. Many ripples are many words which make up a
    thought. Uttering the word "peace" for instance causes many of these
    ripples to form as you contact and release predefined emotions
    connected in your brain pidgeon hole library of words to this one
    word/thought.

    There is a great leap between word and feeling. Though most words are
    not abandoned from a feeling that comes along with it. A thought on
    the other hand is a very analytical way of stating that there can be
    a word without emotion. It is a very interesting statement. And
    indeed it is true that thought is a total product of conditioning.
    One could for instance be conditioned from childhood that the taste
    of sweet belongs to salt. But of course the feelings one encounters
    when tasting salt and sugar define themselves within ourselves
    somewhere as something that is distinct and different to each other.
    These are feelings and not thoughts. A feeling of good or bad,
    pleasing or not associated with one of these words/experiences is not
    a thought either, but they are emotions. A thought, "I am reading"
    can be a totally emotionally empty statement. You are reading right
    now, but how many of us read without emotion?

    > I find all to often reciting a sound but missing the actual idea
    beyond it in most of the practices. (Breathing, impregnation, mastery
    of thougth) and not being able to relate to meaning as i maybe should
    in order to impregnate or create a significant change. (meditating
    upon peace and realising it is something not known to me, or is it?)

    The examples and explaining I have given above are all from the
    Eastern training I had done previously. The practice includes the
    practitioner into emotional experience right away. The goal is a
    quieting of the mind, a peaceful mind. The idea is that if you want
    peace, be peace.

    Now on to the Bardon techniques. Rawn and others will speack much
    more pointedly and effectively on this than I at this stage in my
    maturety of the Bardon techniques. Basically though in either
    Bardon's techniques, or in Rawn Clark's techniques you will find that
    you will affirm the idea/emotion of peace first already established.
    Then it can happen. There are many ways to explain how this can
    happen within you. I have spent the time above in explaining
    following the root of a word within yourself to its origin and the
    anatomy of it, concerning the Eastern pranayama Yoga or Buddhist
    viewpoints and methodology.

    I wish you well,
    Chuck

- References:
  - On the nature of a Idea
    - From: Eric Meridiano <ericmeridiano@...>

- Prev by Date: Re: Problems with EOM
- Next by Date: Re: 462 times, violet flame and the 7Rays
- Previous by thread: On the nature of a Idea
- Next by thread: Re: On the nature of a Idea
- Indexes:
  - Main
  - Thread

Main Index | Thread Index